WSOp's/WSO's at Kinloss, what does the future hold? [Archive]

number-cruncher

29th Oct 2010, 16:27

After all the pain of the MRA4 being cancelled and uncertainty over our futures, it now seems we (WSOp's/WSO's) are being told that our job is now also at risk as there aren't enough jobs to use us up. To say this is a major kick in the B****** is an understatement. How can the Royal Air Force treat it's employees with such contempt after all the years service given and loyalty shown through thick and thin. On a count on the manning website there were 181 posts filled at Kinloss in the WSOp cadre. (sorry no count for WSO's)
Right now I don't know whether to apply for posts elsewhere in the Air Force, go for a commission or start to look outside. (I have done 2 out of the 3) All we need is some form of timescales from manning so our families can at least make plans which is the least we deserve. I know a lot of people on here have never been up to RAF Kinloss or fully understand the specialisations we had employed onboard the Nimrod but suffice to say most people expected to spend their entire careers on Nimrod at Kinloss and a lot have the best part of 20yrs or more on type.
Now you can say that we are in the military and should expect to move every 3 years so dry our eyes. This just is not the case with Nimrod at Kinloss. You were pretty much set for a full career up here if you chose that route and most people settled and have kids born and raised in the North so it’s not just a case of move and get on with it. Who is going to buy your house? What will your wife do with her career? What about the kids settled at school? Our mind set was never to move every 3 years so that’s where we differ up here.
Whilst many of the old sweats are quite happy with redundancy as they will go to immediate pension with gratuity and redundancy payment,(also not much left on their mortgages) a lot of the young guys are still in their early careers but nearing the 12 year point only to be told that that may be it. Who would have thought that after a ¼ million pounds training program each that they could just say tough luck for being at Kinloss when it all went wrong,. It’s a sad day when highly trained individuals within the RAF will face compulsory redundancy. And to rub salt into the wound, redundancy payments have changed at the crucial time.
I just hope manning get their act together and give us a timescale very soon as I fear moral which is already low will become unbearable. It has gotten to the point where people have a sniff of a possible post elsewhere and it’s all hush hush survival of the fittest. Is this really the way we are?
Me...I want to stay in the service.

Impiger

29th Oct 2010, 17:15

Your skill set will be very valuable in the Reaper (and future RPAS) community. The smart guys should be heading that way fast.

xenolith

29th Oct 2010, 17:25

Arn't those slots being taken by rotary loadies?

Pontius Navigator

29th Oct 2010, 18:32

How can the Royal Air Force treat it's employees with such contempt after all the years service given and loyalty shown through thick and thin

SNAFU.

They did this with the Sim Techs about 15 years ago. Got rid of the job and chopped the lot, root and branch, even those that were newly trained productive radar techs on the E3 which was working up at the time.

Lima Juliet

29th Oct 2010, 19:00

WSO/WSOp choices are:

E-3D SENTRY
MQ-9 REAPER
SENTINEL R1
RIVET JOINT
SHADOW R1
CHINOOK HC2/2A
PUMA HC1
MERLIN HC3
SEA KING HAR3/3A
TORNADO GR4
C-17A GLOBEMASTER
HERCULES C4/C5 (J Model)

55(R) Sqn, 207(R) Sqn and 60(R) Sqn will probably wind back a bit but start to see movement of some of the "golden oldies" soon depending on what happens to MFTS - some vacancies might be possible?

I've left out TRISTAR, HERCULES C1/C3 and VC10 as they go out of service in the next 3-4 years or so.

I really can't imagine it is "game over" if you're willing to move and willing to wait for OCUs. You may have to cross-over specialisations, but hey, there are plenty that have done this before. Also, what about pilot crossovers for the under 30s?

So of the 180odd without portfolio at present, maybe 50% will want to take redundancy payment and an IP/EDP - that leaves about 90. I know that there are about 35 WSO/WSOp places coming up in the next 18 months on at least 2 of the above platforms for quality individuals; so if your F5200s are a good read then shouldn't have any issues.

Keep the faith brother, I am sure that some brighter news will come soon. :ok:

LJ

PS. If you think you have it tough then at least you're not a Harrier pilot. There's just Typhoon and GR4 to choose from and I understand that OCUs are "chocker" at present (especially with the small draw down of GR4). I heard rumours that they might offer some back-seats to the younger Harrier-jocks in GR4 until OCUs and F-35C come around! (I say again, just a rumour!). Also, all that single-engine viffy-viffy nozzley-nozzley stuff doesn't cut it with the Airlines any more - they'll need to get some proper ME time to be competitive for the long-haul jobs (ie. the well paid ones) as they will probably only have a frozen ATPL(A). :eek:

Alber Ratman

29th Oct 2010, 19:20

All I will say Number Cruncher, is welcome to the real world. It isn't cosy or nice. If you get a compulsary, at least you will have time to sort out your affairs. I spent 3 months of this year worrying if I was going to get the chop from my present job (I'm ex RAF with 25 years), and if I had, I would get 1 month notice (pay, with no additional redundancy payments). I wish you well in whatever happens, but expect little sympathy, as this happens in the outside to many people. Remember, to the RAF, you are a service number and it doesn't really care what you do or fare when you hand in your ID card.:uhoh:

High_Expect

29th Oct 2010, 19:23

Cruncher... Whilst I do have empathy for you and all those at Kinloss. It is a horrendous situation for anyone to be in. I feel your point about wives careers and kids invalid. There is nothing different in your "contract" that says you're entitled to stability. You would by others, until now, have been considered very lucky. My wife would love to continue the career she spent 6 years training for (longer than a FJ mate) unfortunatly it takes longer to progress to the next stage than three years. (she also hasn't found a job in the last 18months).

Once again I feel for you guys and girls. However, there are a lot of others who have moved every 2-3 years for the last 12+ years who may well find themselves in a similar situation. The point has already been made about the bum to seat ratio in the FJ world (we've lost around 35% of our FJ fleet with the reduction in GR slots.)

I hope it all works out for you.:ok:

vecvechookattack

29th Oct 2010, 19:26

What does a WSOP do..? What does a WSO do?

Pontius Navigator

29th Oct 2010, 19:31

Thing about Kinloss compared with the English Air Force is its very remoteness and, as NC says, many have houses there as it was practically a given that their career would be settled in the north of Scotland.

For an Englishman made redundant up there it is akin to being made redundant overseas without a posting home first. I am sure that has happened but it doesn't make it any better.

Justanopinion

29th Oct 2010, 20:20

Having recently handed in my PVR and told I would go on to half flying pay (I was expecting this anyway), it got me thinking about the rules on this.

Having asked around, I am told that flying pay is purely a retention pay and if so then I am screwed and whinge over. However if it is purely a retention payment, then why not just take the lot off me?

As I am on the bottom rate I now get just over £3 a day for being on a front line sqn and am also about to deploy to the gulf for Queen and country. (8th time) Meanwhile there are people who have been on ground tours for god knows how many years and are on middle and top rates of flying pay and they haven't seen a sandy place for some time. (excluding PA) Not really fair in my view.

Can I just do half the flights then or just refuse to do a Gulf tour? (I won't do that as I am a professional to the last day).

It's just like one last kick in the goolies for Queen and country.

Number-cruncher ....... One of your posts from 2008? Change of heart?

Wrathmonk

29th Oct 2010, 20:34

@ Justanopinion

I think they call this a 'Dohhhhhhhhh!' moment.

@vecvec

Same as RN lookers ....... only better and with more style!;)

gijoe

29th Oct 2010, 21:25

Well done Justanopinion for finding that little gem. :hmm:

I think our thread initiator would do best to wind his neck in and stag on like the rest of us have had to do over the years wherever that may have been.

As PN said above, there are no guarantees in any service career, no wife job chits, no school education chits, no own home chits...and as I said before, if you don't like then leave.

Harsh - maybe. Reality - yes.

I suggest that the original poster drops his victim act very quickly.

G:ok:

Willard Whyte

29th Oct 2010, 21:40

In 5 yrs time I'll be happy to have a job. 'Nuff said.

cargosales

29th Oct 2010, 21:50

c130jbloke

30th Oct 2010, 02:08

Things are way worse on the outside, so best dry your eyes princess :ok:

As for the whinge about the other WSOp having the nice houses - well you should have got in earlier. When you sign on the line, there is no promise of an entire career at one location - I am sure there was much nail biting when St Mawgan went too.

fergineer

30th Oct 2010, 04:42

Hope for you then C130j bloke that they dont bring in seniority and that all the guys coming down from Kinloss that have more seniority than you will take your slot regardless of being qualified to do so or not.What would your feelings be to that? Stranger things have happened these last few weeks. I dont know where your seniority lies but if its a fair way down the pecking order you may have to worry.

sargs

30th Oct 2010, 06:57

What Fergineer has said has hit the nail on the head. This isn't a "Kinloss Problem" - this is a problem that all WSOps wiil have to confront over the next few years, particularly the EW/Aco specialities. I am not saying that a RW crewman will lose his job in favour of a bloke from Kinloss (although if you have a poor F5200 it could be a possibility), but just because you have a comfortable job on E3 or Reaper, for example, does not make you immune from the axe. As for all the blah about wife/kids/job/mortgage/cat stability, get real - you can, and should reasonably expect, to be moved whenever they like if you want a full Service career. It's only the efforts of the Manning Desk that have allowed most people the stability that many aspire to.

QTRZulu

30th Oct 2010, 07:53

The way I see it;

1) On a 12 year engagement and done 8 years or more - Worry!
2) Over 51 years old - Worry!
3) Average Joe - Worry!
4) Everyone else - Worry!

As has been stated this will impact on ALL NCA trades. The bottom line is we are a mere commodity that can be traded and if you don't cut the mustard they will look at binning you!

It really is time to build a solid case for your defence wherever you are - no one is indispensable. Its not pleasant, but it is the harsh reality of the modern Armed Forces.

number-cruncher

30th Oct 2010, 09:54

Justanopinion
:ok:
Well done for researching my previous post but that was for purely personal reasons and sorted itself out in the end which I was pleased about.

GiJoe

Victim Act dropped!!!!!

I don't feel a victim here because I am man enough and confident enough that I will sort myself out whatever the outcome. It's survival now. That original post I can assure you is the general feeling of the lads and lasses up here at the moment.

LJ

As for the list of various platforms which I was already aware we can be employed on, we are being told that OCU's are already backed up for the next 12 - 18 months and any spare slots were used up by the early exit of MR2 and thus more bods from up here heading south.

I expected the dry your eyes, welcome to the real world etc etc. I am in the real world and have worked in civvie street for a number of years before service so I do know what it's like out there as does mrs nc.
The point is a lot of the guys ARE willing to move but the word on the street is there is nowhere to move to due to OCU backlogs etc on other a/c types.

vecvechookattack

30th Oct 2010, 10:44

How many WSOps fly in a Nimrod on a normal sortie...?

Jayand

30th Oct 2010, 10:49

What about the guys who have got their own houses? they are potentially in a far worse situation, they now own houses that are probably worth much less than they paid for them with little prospect of being able to sell or rent them out! they could be forced to sell for a much reduced price or forced to leave their families behind whilst they "possibly" get a new job down south somewhere.
Being young and not on the housing market could be the best pot to be in at Kinloss right now, so in a nut shell stop feeling sorry for yourself and start plotting your escape if there are any!

Petasus

30th Oct 2010, 11:05

6-8 WSOps used to fly on the Nimrod, less the Engineer, and dependant on crew composition.

Anyway, this thread is alarming and depressing. I get the impression that people on here are doing a little too much scaremongering.

Does anyone actually know about forced redundancies yet? Does anyone know about voluntary redundancies yet?

If they do can we please have some pukka information then?

Otherwise any young WSOs/WSOps reading this should remember that it's just a rumour forum.

There may well be unpopular moves ahead for some and those at the end or start of their contracts may feel they need to worry - but that is mere speculation and by saying that I may be just as bad as the doom and gloom merchants here.

Whilst not wanting to stick my head in the sand and thinking it won't happen to me, these changes may take years to implement - I would very much doubt that people are going to queuing at the job centre next week.

As for feathering your nest and making yourself look more important than you really are - I think that's a load of old tosh for most cases. Many WSOps, particularly Sgts, don't have that luxury available and will have to just wait and see what happens, and of course, when.

Do we actually know when these decisions are going to happen? PR 11 perhaps? Which is Spring 2011 I believe, although please feel free to correct me.

We could look at the last 'big chop' of people and make assumptions from that if that would give some people a bit of hope. Now, I don't know exact numbers and this is a small bit of knowledge that I have, but some AEOps did take voluntary redundancy after Options for Change - does anyone know of forced redundancies? An honest question.

Would it be too much to ask people to employ their common sense in looking at this realistically, not just make wild predictions that we are all in dire trouble? If people are in the know, AND they can let us know, then please fire away.

Rant off. Out.

Jayand

30th Oct 2010, 12:05

I don't think it's scaremongering to suggest that their isn't enough jobs available to go around for many in the NCA cadre, the RAF is getting cut by 5000 so exactly where are the Kinloss NCA all going to go? yes a few to UAV's yes a few to SH although there is already a big line to join and a rather inadequate training system to cope with it! perhaps a few to fixed wing LM and some to SAR, what of the numerous rest? common sense if unpalatable suggests that they are at risk of losing their jobs.

Pontius Navigator

30th Oct 2010, 12:10

Petasus, a nice upbeat post, however it misses the point that redundancies or not there will be precious few jobs for anyone at ISK in the short term and, if rumour is to be believed, ISL in the not too distant future either.

This means that almost everyone will be uprooted.

Those with houses will, as previously pointed out, have a choice of leaving family behind while they are posted or they seek jobs elsewhere or leaving their house empty and moving into a quarter supposing they are still employed by Betty.

Even those in quarters may also have to leave family behind while the personnel shuffle goes on. For those posted to other roles the usual advice is not to move your family until you pass the course.

Sideshow Bob

30th Oct 2010, 13:43

It's going to be a tough time for all, not just the AEOp's. The whole airforce is going to suffer. There's over 2000 at Kinloss, less than 200 are WSOp's of one badge or another.
If you aren't on a pensionable engagement and your SJAR isn't particularly spectacular, worry.
If you are on the new pension scheme and your SJAR isn't particularly spectacular, worry.
If you are a young fit WSOp of any brevet, volunteer for rotary as soon as there are spaces on the courses.
The only known fact is that no one knows how many of which trades are going yet, but bet your bottom dollar as soon as they do we will be subjected to a reverse promotion board.

getsometimein

30th Oct 2010, 14:13

Sideshow Bob.

According to Kinloss OC, there is around 1300 people at Kinloss....

And we're led to believe there is an 18 month waiting list on all Rotary WSOp training due to a bottleneck at Shawbury... You SURE there is spaces? Because there doesn't appear to be any being offered!

Sideshow Bob

30th Oct 2010, 14:18

as soon as there are spaces on the courses

Like I said get your word in, no one is going to do it for you, It's every man for himself at the moment. It's about the only job where there's going to be expansion.

There was 2000 when I left, but then again the whole Sqn went with me so 1300 about right.

WannabeCrewman

30th Oct 2010, 15:07

Wow, this makes for heavy reading; I am due to start at Halton in two weeks, probably picked the worst time in years to join. One supposes that really shining at NCAITC and 55 Sqn will increase my chances of there being a spot available... That said in the present climate I suppose nothing is certain.

Squeeky bum time as they say....
Matt

Pontius Navigator

30th Oct 2010, 15:34

Matt, that is one of the quirks of the reduction in personnel. New blood is still needed at the bottom to keep feeding the system.

While many already in could be retrained to new roles everyone gets older year by year and they can't have big gaps occuring through a complete recruitment freeze.

getsometimein

30th Oct 2010, 15:36

Looks like NCA will cease to exist in 10 years time anyway....

Depressing, but there is little need for specialist aircrew now, except maybe pilots...

Sideshow Bob

30th Oct 2010, 16:23

Looks like NCA will cease to exist in 10 years time anyway....

Depressing, but there is little need for specialist aircrew now, except maybe pilots...

No NCA, who will man the C17, A400M, Chinook, Merlin, Puma, A330MRTT (KC-30 or whatever name it has this week) E-3D, Rivet Joint (Maybe Preditor Maybe some other UAV's) ect then, do you know something we don't.

Mate, this isn't the end of the AEOp just a re-adjustment of manning, something us Air Eng's have had to live with for the last decade.

Petasus

30th Oct 2010, 17:01

Pontius, a valid point but not one that I've missed. Given the option of an uproot (to be expected in military circles, no matter what the job) or out of work, I would think that most would take the move.

Without trying to contradict myself, I would think that if ISK does, sadly, close then people will have to move, (numbers noted sideshow) that's a fact. What isn't a fact is the redundancy issues. Yet. Alot of people seem to be telling us to worry without proper fact.

On another thread a little more perspective is employed and the opinions seem to be that if the worst does come to the worst, it won't be a sudden issue. Who at the moment knows whether AFPS 05 people will be better off or not? Nobody I would wager, or rather nobody who is going to post on here.

Do we realistically think that 5000 poeple will just receive a brown envelope? I don't. There are mechanisms to achieve the numbers and not just widescale instant redundancy. I think Sideshow could give us an idea of what he and his mates have done to survive a similiar stupid decision - not all Air Engs are on the outside now. Having said that I can see what the problems are with people and jobs available.

I do feel for those at Kinloss, the not knowing about your job, career and home must be awful. But having to move out of necessity is just tough frankly, I wouldn't want to leave my family at a trying time but I've done it before and I'd do it again. Part of service life I'm afraid, well, that's how I see it anyway.

Pontius Navigator

30th Oct 2010, 17:04

On a positive note, many of the reduction was not expected to be too hard to achieve. Also the reductions this time are about half the reductions in percentage terms as in the early 90s with the peace dividend.

Seldomfitforpurpose

30th Oct 2010, 17:26

About 2500 natural wastage and 2500 brown envelopes is what I am hearing.

Whilst I have some sympathy those who were not astute enough to see that the game of musical chairs was going to come to a grinding halt with this SDSR package may well live to regret that lack of fore sightedness.

Without a bum on the seat of a working platform quite a few folk are going to be out of work in the coming months.

Tiger_mate

30th Oct 2010, 17:30

The folk on '05 pension is an interesting one because it is/was designed to retain personnel until their 55th birthday and has been very effective at doing so. This of course means that if you choose to leave before you are 55 through whichever course of action (pvr/ngr) you would have been financially disadvantaged. (Notwithstanding the leave in your final year for tax purposes if you intend to continue working scam).

To 'sack' people presently employed in a 'pic' that does not get subsequently disestablished is forbidden under civil law and more often these days, civil law is being adhered to by the military. I know that HMG believe themselves to have a get-out-clause for all walks of lifes mysteries but EDP for the rest of your life is somewhat differant to a time critical PA pension. I guess the punchline is that some people may find themselves in an unwanted position that could be legally challenged, unless Manning box very clever at a targeted audience. Of course the closure of any base makes an entire workforce vulnerable even within civilian guidelines.

Biggus

30th Oct 2010, 17:41

Tiger,

AFPS05 is not terribly complicated, but is widely misunderstood - especially by those not on it.

As an example, but I don't want to have to go through all the fine detail, if you leave the RAF on AFPS05 at 54 years 364 days you (ultimately) get more money than someone who left at 55. You just don't get it as early (hence your personal circumstances are very important).

Exactly how far before your 55 point you can leave under AFPS05 and still get the same amount of money as if you had stayed to the end I haven't calculated, but it wouldn't be too hard to work out!

davejb

30th Oct 2010, 18:34

Mmmmm,
As for all the blah about wife/kids/job/mortgage/cat stability, get real - you can, and should reasonably expect, to be moved whenever they like if you want a full Service career.

First off, many folk join the services to enjoy world travel and a regular shift from base to base. If you were a kipper fleet NCO you got sent to Kinloss (since DG closed) and rotted there until Andy Stewart became Emperor. Having resolved themselves to accept this lack of movement, many tried desperately to enjoy curling, caelidhs, and various winter sports - which every sensible chap knows are uncomfortable at best and dangerous otherwise. Don't tell folk who have been denied the opportunity to enjoy our dwindling number of far flung bases over the years that they're somehow at fault for counting on the moribund stability they've endured for several decades now that the goalposts have been moved - overnight.

The problem with an airbase closure, which is what we are almost certainly looking at, is that your house is on the market along with a hell of a lot of other houses, all at the same time.

Moray is currently aghast, I think it'd be fair to say - it's not just the RAF personnel, but the local towns are having nightmares about the loss of income from the RAF, at the same time as local government cuts are biting deep and about to draw blood. Now dump lots of houses on the local market, which is far from buoyant anyway....I'm sure many a serviceman is currently imagining being permanently away from home, if he/she is posted elsewhere, as it will probably take years and years to break even on the house.... when it finally sells... and the wife/hubby and kids can join them.

Now throw in the closure of RAF Lossie, which everyone thinks is a foregone conclusion, and the problem doubles.

An individual being required to exit - well, tough luck, dry your eyes princess etc (I dislike that phrase, it seems to denote the self abusers in our community frankly) - but when you close a station the problems magnify tremendously, and I think it's more than a little stupid to not realise that this isn't a 'you are all subject to posting' type problem but a major upheaval that should never have been required....had our finances been appropriately managed.

So, my sympathy is with the personnel of RAF Kinloss, I expect to extend that sympathy to Lossie 6 months or so down the line, the people of Moray who will suffer the double whammy of harsh cuts in local government spending coupled with the deletion of a large part of the local community will also need - but I guess won't get - some help too.

Almost unnoticeable in all this, is the impact of losing so many folk who spent their spare time contributing to virtually every local charity, every local initiative - a LOT of the things that improved the lives of all around here will go when Kinloss dies.

Yes, I think NCA - but also everyone else at Kinloss - should be given a break. The defence review (bollerks, it was a spending review) has incidentally probably economically blighted a large part of Scotland, which call me Dave probably doesn't care about as there's more chance of Bin Laden getting the local seat than a Tory... as an englishman living and working in Forres, following a career ('he careered downhill') as NCO aircrew, I think we should all currently be booing and hissing the politicians, not servicemen.

Dave

RumPunch

30th Oct 2010, 21:14

At least you guys are signed on to 55 so to get rid of you all would require a hefty pay off and an immediate pension. Us Groundies dont have any of the benefits you guys get and we are in at work every day while we watch the aircrew bretheren each side of us on permanant gardening leave. You think you have it bad :=

getsometimein

30th Oct 2010, 21:35

Plenty of us not signed on to 55 matey..

As for me, i'm worth a pittence in redundency, dont qualify for ressettlement grant for another 18 months, and have little future in an Air Force I was hoping to give 30+ years of my life...

RumPunch

30th Oct 2010, 21:47

Sorry I thought all Aircrew were signed on to that :(
Well I hope they give the guys a good pay off anyway. Plenty guys can move on and get a new career with some cash in the bank. I just hope its true they are going to fish out you guys to the commonwealth countries and the US to keep the trade.

davejb

30th Oct 2010, 21:48

Actually RP they're on engagements that reflect what the powers that be decided to offer over the years - aircrew have been signed on for 8, 9 or 12 years initially. This is quite a significant commitment to an 18 year old... at that age it's seen more as a high price to pay for what you want than a guarantee of employment everyone else would give their eye teeth for. (I signed on for 12 years - at age 18 would you have happily signed on to age 30? That seemed a lifetime away to me...)

Swings and roundabouts pal, the RAF required a big commitment before they'd let us be aircrew, once they had us they wanted to keep us so - in the past - re-engagement offers weren't hard to come by if you were good enough at the job.

However, aircrew are not all on to age 55, not by a long chalk - just as the senior NCO's in every other section may be on to 55 while those under them are not so some aircrew are in for keeps whilst others are on shorter engagements... just as I expect people in your own trade are. I currently work with an ex WO, one of several I know, who took his pension (from a ground trade) and is now adding to it by putting in some less stressful hours elsewhere. He certainly got his 55 in.

EVERYONE at Kinloss has it bad - some less than others, for example I imagine a rock or a copper, or any of the admin staff, or any one of a number of other trades can be posted elsewhere to a similar/same job, possibly needing a bit of a conversion course enroute. Many of the aircrew you are apparently envious of have no job to move to, and are probably looking at redundancy... helped enormously by the new rules on redundancy that are about to cut the rug from under their feet.

Personally I'd say the ground trades have an advantage at this point....but I think it'd be better all round if servicemen weren't sniping at each other, don't you think?

Dave

RumPunch

30th Oct 2010, 22:06

Agreed Dave , we are all in the poo and I just want to see the best for everyone. I have done 18 years for the kipper fleet and I am so sad this is the end. The way the MR2 went was bad enough but this is worse as its the most undignified way to end something so good that has done so much. We never had afterburners and looked good at airshows thats why we were canned.
Anyway I wish you guys the best in whatever the future holds , I have my memories and the good times with all the Squadrons , I will miss you all and have many guys wondering if we are going to hold the mother of all piss ups.

Rigga

30th Oct 2010, 23:48

...well, thats what you get for putting all your eggs in one basket.

ShortFatOne

31st Oct 2010, 00:17

because all our other baskets were sacrificed (and are still being sacrificed) to sate the thirst of the omnipotent god that is fast-jet.

The B Word

31st Oct 2010, 09:11

Oh Stumpy One

There is a chicken and egg argument here. Cancel MRA4 and keep FJs, thus asking the Coalition for MPA help. Or cancel FJs and keep MRA4, thus asking the Coalition for FJ help. Now seeing as AP3000's first guiding principle is "The ability to project power from the air and space to influence the behaviour of people or the course of events", then the egg (FJ) has just got more important than the chicken (MRA4).

A difficult choice, but I believe the right one - and I have no conflict of interest as I no longer fly FJs.

The B Word

Neptunus Rex

31st Oct 2010, 10:02

Retaining LRMP would not have required the total sacrifice of 'Fast Jet.'

Now, If I wanted to attack the UK, I would not send bombers that could be shot down by UK fighters. I would send a pack of submarines, coming from different directions, all armed with cruise missiles. Who now is going to detect and deter them? Their primary targets would be the mere handful of 'Fast Jet' bases and their infrastructure.

Of course, it would take many more than nine LRMP, but that is another story, yet part of the same sorry saga that is Defence of the Realm in the 21st Century.

Sideshow Bob

31st Oct 2010, 10:37

Thing is this is not the first time we have gone through this, when I joined in the mid 80's there was something like 96000 in the Airforce. Once this is over we will be at about a 1/3 of this. It's a difficult time but you just have to ride through it. No matter what you do, the decision is not yours to make (unless you volunteer, there was lots of volunteers in the mid 90's who did not get redundancy). All you can do is try to keep working hard and don't let your head go down, show yourself as a better prospect than the next man.

The numbers have not been decided yet (I heard about 2600 natural wastage 2400 redundancy, no-one knows how many will volunteer) and even then, it's got to be broken down into trade, rank and target group (time left, engagement ect). This isn't going to be released for about 6 months.

The only difference I can see with APFS '05 is if you are past your initial pension point you only get a half pension until age 55. If you are on AFPS '75 you get a full pension. That's just my take but then again we will have to wait and see what the terms are when released

Tigermate it's a bit more complicated than Pic's. Lots of people in the 90's were let go without their pics going, legally. The main thing is Manning Levels; you can't get rid of say 20 Air Engs and then recruit 20 SAC Mechs to do their job (though some may be better at it).

It's a tough time for all WSOp's (remember we are all one trade now so it is easier for them to re-allocate manpower). We just have to ride it out. I may not survive but I'm certainly not going to worry about what if's.

wokkamate

31st Oct 2010, 11:08

@ Neptunus Rex:

'if I wanted to attack the UK.....'

Ok mate, if someone is going to attack the UK from multiple submarines with cruise missiles then we have bigger issues at stake here than loss of the MRA4! Luckily, AQ don't have subs (yet).....

I think this thread is getting (understandably) pretty emotional now. I feel for all the people of RAF Kinloss and I too mourn the loss of capability. However, you have all been lucky enough to have the stability of living in one place for many many years while the rest of us got moved every 2-2 1/2 years. Now it is time for you all to join the rest of the RAF. Get looking, get proactive in your search for a job and keep a holiday home in the north of Scotland, while moving yourself and your family into nice cheap SFA at wherever you are lucky enough to get posted too next.

Bored of the bleating, but understand where you are all coming from, however sh*t happens, we adapt and move on or we leave. Good luck, all of you.

c130jbloke

31st Oct 2010, 11:10

First of all I agree with most of the comments made on this thread - especially with the pending impact this will have on people's lives and their families. My "princess" comment was harsh, but don't begrudge the next man.
As for redundancy - best of luck to all. Whatever happens, the Kinloss NCA lifestyle has gone, so as Darwin said evolve or die :sad:

Its not just up north who are stressing. At the top secret Wilts / Oxon centres of excellence there are a lot of people looking over their shoulders wondering what is going to happen too. If I were a VC10 / Tri* eng right now, I would be smashing the ACOS door trying to get an ALM crossover.

Hard times. But its good to see that those who got you into this mess are getting what they deserve - not :*

Sideshow Bob

31st Oct 2010, 11:31

If I were a VC10 / Tri* eng right now

If I was an Air Eng full stop, wait a minute, aw b*gg*r ! :uhoh:

Biggus

31st Oct 2010, 11:32

While this is not a personal dig at wokkamate, his comment....

"..you have all been lucky enough to have the stability of living in one place for many many years while the rest of us got moved every 2-2 1/2 years..."

is typical of similar comments made by some on this thread.

I would dispute this particular line of reasoning, or at least the concept that it is rare/lucky - while not claiming that those at Kinloss deserve special treatment.

The question you have to ask is how many other fleets are now single base, and have been for some time, thus providing some aircrew with the possibility of spending an entire flying career at one location.

For example, how many people may have spent their entire flying career at either:

Lyneham
Odiham
Brize Norton
Waddington
Kinloss

You could even argue that with the closure of RAFG some years ago, some people had a considerable period of stability at:

Coltishall
Wittering (Cottesmore is not far to drive)

Yes, geographically Kinloss provides an extreme example, but as the RAF has shrunk over the years many aircraft fleets now occupy only one base, providing potential stability for aircrew who stay on one type.

Oh, and I moved 12 times in my first 20 years in the RAF, so please don't think I have a personal issue with this either way - just trying to be objective! ;)

Joe Black

31st Oct 2010, 12:10

Gents,

For what it's worth I firmly believe that the vast majority of WSOp/WSOs at ISK are more than willing to travel south; some are even happy about this decision. The problem is that there is not going to be that opportunity for the majority;regardless of previous reports and your service history, this will come down to who is the cheapest to get rid.....which is WRONG.

There are guys up here who have 3 or 4 years left till they reach their 12 year exit points and have all the ticks in the box for promotion/extension of service...but will happen? They will go and some inferior personnel with longer contracts will stay..how is that right? Not many will apply for redundancy, which means there are going to be a lot of "wrong" compulsories.
:ugh:

Evalu8ter

31st Oct 2010, 12:36

B Word - don't want to appear a pedant but "The ability to project power from the air and space to influence the behaviour of people or the course of events" can equally apply across the whole spectrum of conflict and types; eg a Nimrod can (sorry, could...) project power either kinetically or with sensors, a RW dropping troops on an objective can seriously influence an enemy as can a FJ "Show of Farce" (spelling deliberate!) The obsession with FJ types thinking that they are the only practioners of air power is as outdated, as, well, I don't know, a maritime nation having a LRMP aircraft....

Vim_Fuego

31st Oct 2010, 12:38

I think this is the crux...Bloke sat on E3's who is already fully trained and CR against perhaps a far better operator from Kinloss whom we'd have to spend money on re-training whilst finding the original bloke something else to do!

Being one of the instructors I'd gladly take 6 dry guys tomorrow and train them up on essentially the same ESM system on E3's...Many's the time we have talked [in our office] about making the ESM seat a specialist position for the AEOp's on the fleet rather than diluting it between the whole SO section...Sadly due to reductions in the force we couldn't cope with training them and a shortened (and in my opinion a common sense option) sqn level introduction to the fleet for that very type of employment would never hold water...

Lima Juliet

31st Oct 2010, 15:34

Neptunus

"armed with cruise missiles" - cruise missiles make perfect targets for fast jets with BVR weapons!

Here's a pic of a Typhoon shooting at a Mirach - about the same size and shape as a cruise missile.

http://www.targetlock.org.uk/typhoon/shootamraam.jpg

And this is a Mirach

http://www.savunmasanayi.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/1_5_2_mirach100_batteria_lancio.jpg

LJ :ok:

m+m

31st Oct 2010, 16:45

"And we're led to believe there is an 18 month waiting list on all Rotary WSOp training due to a bottleneck at Shawbury... You SURE there is spaces? Because there doesn't appear to be any being offered!"

The bottle neck in WSOp training is not at Shawbury!!! It's further down the line! Shawbury is tasked to produce 40 per year and that's exactly what it does.

Diablo Rouge

31st Oct 2010, 18:04

It is understandable that an entire fleet of WSOp cannot be retrained overnight onto other flying platforms, however there must be quite a few ALM employed on ground tours doing jobs that are suitable for former AEOp & AEng to complete productively. This may only be glimmer of light, but surely one worth exploring as said ALM should be able to return to their respective fleets seemlessly. In these times a 'respite tour' on the ground should be firmly placed at the back of the que.

Regarding the Rotary Training, surely SARTU (& 84 [Cyprus] Sqn) could afford to loose a few Griffins to 60 Sqn whilst expanding the use of AW139 at Valley, thus enabling DHFS to expand its QHCI staff manning and thus accomodate the retreads. I appreciate that this could send a tsunami of basic crewmen on to Benson & Odiham but if my understanding is correct, the Merlin OCF needs to ramp up again whilst the Puma & Chinook OCF remain in full swing (against expectation regarding Puma).

Or are the newly redundant CHF Naval Aircrewmen usurping the self sustainment of RAF WSOp with cross service transfers to the RAF Merlin Force? ie A bigger picture to the WSOp crisis than has been discussed here thus far.

Assuming RCC Kinloss will be mandated to move, that organisation could provide jobs for WSOp in the interim until this mess stabilises. ....and the system could do a whole lot worse than for once actually be flush with NCA manpower from which the deadwood will fall in competition with the motivated thrusters prepared to go anywhere at anytime; a principle that Manning strive for.

Best not send any AEOp to Careers Offices though for unbiased advice may be hard to deliver. I am sure in the fullness of time, those who seek redundancy will get it and those who are career minded will find a new home, whilst accepting that a turbulent few years is likely to be in abundance.

Biggus

31st Oct 2010, 18:37

DR,

I don't know how big you think the RCC is, but, unless it has grown considerably since the last time I visited it, it won't provide employment for many WSOps! In addition, what is your cunning plan for re-employing the WSOps currently working in the RCC that you have just displaced, all you have done is replace one problem with a new one of equal size...

Which brings me to my basic point. Prior to the demise of the MRA4, RAF Manning (presumably) had a figure for the number of WSOps and WSOs it would need over the next few years. With the demise of the MRA4 that figure will have to be revised - downwards. I would surmise that some 120-150 WSOps and 40-50 WSOs are no longer required. Let alone considering the impact of the early withdrawl of Sentinel and the C-130J.

That reduction in numbers needs to be managed. That is the challenge that Manning face. I would surmise that natural wastage is unlikely to be enough - therefore redundancies, of whatever sort, are likely to occur. There is a difference between being alarmist and simply not burying your head in the sand

GalleyTeapot

31st Oct 2010, 20:16

Diablo - "Regarding the Rotary Training, surely SARTU (& 84 [Cyprus] Sqn) could afford to loose a few Griffins to 60 Sqn"

No!

" whilst expanding the use of AW139 at Valley'

AW139 don't 'belong' to DHFS in the same way the Griffin does.

wokkamate

31st Oct 2010, 20:31

Biggus,

Fair enough mate, I am a CH47 mate, but in my 17 years in the mob, I have moved a total of 10 times.

My point is more that those who have been based at Kinloss for 20 years (yadda yadda) should consider themselves lucky and not be whinging. I bought a house not because it was convenient for my home base but because it made financial sense but because it was an investment for when I leave, I have always lived in SFA.

The house I bought is central to all my future postings, so I have hedged my bets there, but if I was posted overseas (NATO etc) I would go and not whinge. When one joins the mob, one does it in the full expectation that you MIGHT have to move every two or so years and one should, therefore, be ready and willing to do so - wherever one ends up. Simple.

Take the Queens shilling, abide by her rules and suck it up. Life is about choices, you don't like being mucked about? Don't join the military! :ok:

wokkamate

31st Oct 2010, 20:35

@ Rumpunch:

'We never had afterburners and looked good at airshows thats why we were canned.'

Utter utter hoop mate. Get a grip

The MR2 did an amazing job, flown by awesome crews and engineered and administered by excellent ground support staff - but it was not binned for its lack of airshow 'impact'.

Comments like yours don't help those who are now very scared at RAF Kinloss.

PFMG

31st Oct 2010, 21:36

It's around this time on a Sunday night after a couple of stiff malt whiskies and whilst the Mrs watches David Tennant getting his end away on the BBC that I think, wouldn't it be cool to log onto prune and give the masses the benefit of a pithy one liner. One that would summarise the dismay of the AEOp world both at Kinloss, Waddo and the various outposts we find ourselves in. I could even attempt to endear ourselves us to our Loadie bretheren both fixed wing and rotary.

Unfortuneately I just feel quite sad that we as a trade will probably never be the same again, that the RAF is pretty much bobbing around with the last floaters in the toilet of defence and that Moray (a county most of my family know as home) is unlikely to recover from being raped by the aftermath of the bankers and sharletons who peddle lies and deceit in the City.

:(

RumPunch

31st Oct 2010, 22:22

wokkamate (http://www.pprune.org/members/307439-wokkamate)

My gripe is not with helo world, Its blatant obvious the MRA4 was canned to save the fast jet world. The correct personnel at the top managed to wangle David Cameron into his mindset. Even Liam Fox tried to sway the PM but he took advice from the wrong people hell bent on making Afghan a longer war that will save the Army.

stingray1971

1st Nov 2010, 01:22

I feel strongly against the wishes of our Government to scrap the MRA4 and leave us short in many areas a coastal nation should be only looking to invest in.
As for those fine people who are now wondering what the future holds, whether in 5 or 10 years time, the requirement for a frame such as the MRA4 will be noticed, acted upon then they will need experience to man it.
We may not see this airframe in air force blue but possibly in navy blue.
The RN were our main benefactors of our primary role and sense dictates that they may gain from our loss.
We will lose many experienced personnel, some nearing their time, others not deserving. It isn't fair, and wailing, complaining etc will not matter.
Move on. the Nimrod is dead.
LRMPA I feel sure is not.
WSOp's may have a very different career path now that the Kinloss bubble has been burst. I hope those that survive SDSR and redundancy embrace what the future holds; and sincerely wish those with no option but to look elsewhere; solace in a job well done.
For all of our variances, those involved with the Nimrod MR2 for the last 10 or so years, aircrew and ground crew alike, can hold our heads high and say that a difference was made, not public knowledge and therefore no high profile announcements.
Well done, and good luck to all.

c130jbloke

1st Nov 2010, 13:18

Rumpunch has indirectly brought up a very salient point.

Just about the whole of the RAF's senior leadership has / is made up from the FJ community ( with a few exceptions ). Therefore there will always be a bias in that direction and why is it always have to be aircrew to reach the very top of the Service ?

Compared to SH / AT, the FJ contribution in AFG has been limited, therefore why is nothing but FJ leadeship when AFG is meant to be the only game in town right now ? And please don't give me any bollacks about a non FJ type not getting the bigger picture: Biographies : GENERAL NORTON A. SCHWARTZ (http://www.af.mil/information/bios/bio.asp?bioID=7077)

Pontius Navigator

1st Nov 2010, 13:29

C130, when did the RN last have an Engineer or a Paymaster as CNS? Or the Army have an Engineer or Logistics man as CGS?

All Services select from a teeth branch.

AQAfive

1st Nov 2010, 13:48

Brian Burridge?
He was a Maritime man until 11Gp and 18gp merged to become 11/18th Hussars!!
A fine example to all officers on how to survive when allegedly kicked out of house by the then wife!!:E

Strato Q

1st Nov 2010, 16:06

C130, when did the RN last have an Engineer or a Paymaster as CNS? Or the Army have an Engineer or Logistics man as CGS?

All Services select from a teeth branch.

PN - not sure if I have fallen for your bait, but isn't the current CGS an engineer?

FFP

1st Nov 2010, 16:25

I'll throw this one out there.....

Those in the aircrew business usually fell into 2 groups going through training. Those that wanted to go far north and those that didn't.

Those that wanted to go were loved by all when the role disposal came around. Those same people could be the ones dishing out the "dry your eye's" lines (not saying they are, but you get my point)

Some compasssion in this whole episode is called for in my opinion. Here's hoping for a soft landing to the redundancies and not a bubble burst for the majority...

4Foxtrot

1st Nov 2010, 16:46

Correct. General Sir Peter Wall was appointed to CGS in Sep of this year and is a Royal Engineer. And wasn't AM French (the old CinC) a Chinook mate?

Pontius Navigator

1st Nov 2010, 17:37

Strato, thanks, however a Sapper would have told me they are usually in front of the infantry and the tanks so technically are as teeth as the Paras.

LFFC

1st Nov 2010, 17:47

Maybe the MRA4s won't get broken up after all:

Government considers sale of aircraft axed in review - Reuters (http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE6A00BB20101101)

Jayand

1st Nov 2010, 18:29

It seems the article is talking entirely about Harrier and nothing to do with Nimrod! the picture of the Nimrod isn't a Mk 4 either.
Given the overruns, the spiralling costs and the history of the project I would be very surprised,no shocked if anyone would buy the MRA 4

Lima Juliet

1st Nov 2010, 18:47

The Assistant Chief of the Air Staff is a Chinook mate.

The Assistant Chief of Defence Staff is a Chinook mate.

There are at least 4 Air Cdre non-FJ mates from Herc, VC10 and RW backgrounds.

So I do not believe it is a FJ old boys club!

baffman

1st Nov 2010, 18:51

Strato, thanks, however a Sapper would have told me they are usually in front of the infantry and the tanks so technically are as teeth as the Paras.

Fair enough, but you did ask when was the last time the Army had an engineer or loggie as CGS, clearly not expecting the answer which you got.

c130jbloke

1st Nov 2010, 19:00

LJ,

Noted, but the CAS is a ? The last CAS was a ? The one before him was a ?

Justanopinion

1st Nov 2010, 19:01

Mmmmm - there are some senior officers who did not start out as FJ aircrew though, the current Commandant of Cranwell was a JT before getting his commission.... so what does that make him? Ambitious?

Lima Juliet

1st Nov 2010, 19:11

Don't forget that the CINC is a Navigator - not that it should make that big a difference.

I think that the glass ceiling for non-FJ aircrew is well and truly broken though.

The B Word

1st Nov 2010, 19:53

Sir, your memory fails you as Baggers is a Tornado GR4 mate.

The B Word

The B Word

1st Nov 2010, 19:56

BTW Sir John Day was a 4-star CINC and was a Wessex mate prior to Sir Brian Burridge who was a Nimrod mate.

So there are plenty of RAF 4-stars in recent years that are non-FJ.

The B Word

F3sRBest

1st Nov 2010, 20:09

Plenty of RAF non-FJ and even non-aircrew (yes really!) made it to 3*/4* outside of the direct RAF Cmd Chain too

Wrathmonk

1st Nov 2010, 20:31

AMP is a rotary mate.....

Ultimately its a numbers game. A lot more FJ mates stay around for a full career (IMHO) as opposed to the ME guys who disappear into the airlines at 38.

iRaven

1st Nov 2010, 23:04

C130jbloke

Your post and subsequent replies reminds me of this famous Monty Python sketch...
#####

Reg is addressing a room of masked commando’s (MC) some are named eg S,X,F etc

R: We get in through the underground heating system here ... up through to the main audience chamber here ... and Pilate's wife's bedroom is here. Having grabbed his wife, we inform Pilate that she is in our custody and forthwith issue our demands. Any questions?
X : What exactly are the demands?
R : We're giving Pilate two days to dismantle the entire apparatus of the Roman Imperialist State and if he doesn't agree immediately we execute her.
R: They've bled us white, the bastards. They've taken everything we had, not just from us, from our fathers and from our fathers' fathers.
S : And from our fathers' fathers' fathers.
R: Yes.
S: And from our fathers' fathers' fathers' fathers.
R: All right, Stan. Don't labour the point. And what have they ever given us IN RETURN? (he pauses smugly)
X: The aqueduct?
R: What?
X: The aqueduct.
R: Oh yeah, yeah they gave us that. Yeah. That's true.
MC: And the sanitation!
S: Oh yes ... sanitation, Reg, you remember what the city used to be like.
R: All right, I'll grant you that the aqueduct and the sanitation are two things that the Romans HAVE done ...
M: And the roads ...
R: (sharply) Well YES OBVIOUSLY the roads ... the roads go without saying. But apart from the aqueduct, the sanitation and the roads ...
MC : Irrigation ...
O: Medicine ... Education ... Health
R: Yes ... all right, fair enough ...
MC : And the wine ...
ALL : Oh yes! True!
F: Yeah. That's something we'd really miss if the Romans left, Reg.
MC: Public baths!
S : AND it's safe to walk in the streets at night now.
F: Yes, they certainly know how to keep order ... (general nodding) ... let's face it, they're the only ones who could in a place like this.
(more general murmurs of agreement)
R: All right ... all right ... but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order ... what HAVE the Romans ever done for US?
X: Brought peace!

c130jbloke

2nd Nov 2010, 07:20

Eeerrr - OK.

My point is though the TOP job is always FJ. Why ? And why is the AMP ( ie the HR manager ) always a pilot too ? Are we saying all our Admin / Ops Sppt officers are not good enough ? I don't think so :=

frodo_monkey

2nd Nov 2010, 07:48

Wasn't AM Bryant (a nav) AMP recently? It isn't always a pilot nor someone of a FJ background.

Justanopinion

2nd Nov 2010, 08:27

Hello, I am here.
I am not really that great a poster, so I tend to leave it for when a thread really gets to me. Also, having left the Service in the last 12 months, I do not feel it to be my place to post, unless I have relevance or experience of what is being discussed, or to defend the position of a fellow PPRuNer.
I think it is safe to say I will not be going after BEagle's record....

C130jbloke - One of your posts from 2007? As you appear to be an ex VC10 ALM in your last few years of service, what experience or relevant knowledge do you have, of the way the RAF selects its very senior officers ....? Just a query mate... don't flash!

stickmonkeytamer

2nd Nov 2010, 10:37

Grumpy106

2nd Nov 2010, 10:55

If I were a WSOp I wouldn't hold out too much hope for an ATC crossover - if ever there was a Branch ripe for civilianisation it is ATC. They are civvies in uniform already! In addition, why should the RAF get rid of highly capable TG9 & 12 operators just to retain a load of jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none 'giz-a-job' NCA?

getsometimein

2nd Nov 2010, 11:20

NCAs are being given the option to remuster to SNCO ATCs. Manning is trawling now for them. You'll lose your SP(F), but get more cakes... and some radar rooms now have windows, so you'll not think you are an ABM, or whatever they are called this week.

Seemingly, NCA are familiar with communications procedure, console operation, airspace regulations, meteorology and the employment of wider airmanship skills. Ideal candidates to take over all of the TG9 slots from those who aspire to be controllers themselves...

Not true, the thought has crossed the mind of manning, and they are considering the possibility of it. Nothing is set in stone.

RAF ATC are not qualified in anything that the civilian agencies recognise, it would take around £20-£30 k to get the qualifications required to move into a civvy job doing the same thing.

The reason its being considered is because direct entrant ATC SNCO's do the same basic training as aircrew. It would effectively be the same as the NCA dude/dudette passing out of basic training and starting ATC training.

Wyler

2nd Nov 2010, 14:19

These people have a very specific set of skills. The myth that they can cross over to something like ATC with relative ease is just that, a myth. As an ABM I have been involved in the training of 2 X WSOp guys from the Nimrod fleet. Neither was successful.
They worked in a very specific way and it proved nigh on impossible for them to quickly adapt to a different way of doing things. It would be the same if you put an ABM in the back of a Nimrod; fish out of water (no pun intended).
Ex FJ AD backseaters, on the other hand, have had no problems at all. For them it is nothing more than an orientation course.
There is no shortage of applicants for every post in every Branch and, quite frankly, you stand a much higher chance of success with a newbie who comes without any baggage, or someone from the relevant Trade Group who has some understanding of the task.

This is not intended as an 'us and them' attack. Getting rid of the Maritime capability will prove, IMHO, to be a disaster. I hope every one of those affected gets looked after properly.

Canadian Break

2nd Nov 2010, 17:41

Not strictly true; on the first "orientation" course there were 2 FJ backseaters and one herc nav, who had done time with the RN AEW Seakings. The "orientation" course turned into the full 28 week (or similar-it's been a long time) course. Two passed (just, with "political" pressure applied) the course, but were subsequently either withdrawn from post-grad training or "sidelined" because they were not cutting the mustard. The third was promoted just as we sere deciding how much flex we could give him in order to try to get him through.

minigundiplomat

2nd Nov 2010, 18:05

As an ABM I have been involved in the training of 2 X WSOp guys from the Nimrod fleet. Neither was successful.

Were they at fault, or your training?

Most AEOps seem fairly switched on. Are you saying none of them can hack it as Playstation Space Managers or whatever you term yourselves?

c130jbloke

2nd Nov 2010, 18:19

Justanopinion:

Fair point - you are correct and no flaming a pertinant question :ok:.

In the company ( airline ) I work for now its very much a case if you want to get to the top you need to have an overview of the whole set up. It's no good saying you are a pilot or accountant or whatever. It's based very much on leadership ( and getting the nod from the board ). Our last CEO had a background in the food industry but was deemed to have " the right stuff" for what the company needed at a time when it was in deep poo. When I quizzed one of the other directors as to what made this guy worthy of the job the reply was summarized into :

“See the big picture, make the big decisions and protect the bottom line “

And if fairness to him, we are now in better shape than when he arrived.

Between 05 - 07 I also studied for an MSc in Air Transport Management and I looked at the whole leadership thing for the RAF in pretty close detail. This led me to conclude that whilst I would never challenge the caliber of those at the top ( lets be honest - way better than me ) the fact that we limit selection from only a small cadre made me decide that maybe there was a better way of doing things - more people to choose from = better quality ?

As I submitted in a previous post, in the US, SecDef Robert Gates was fed up with the F-22 obsessed leadership in the USAF whilst they were bogged down in AFG / Iraq. That's why he chose to put a shot across some bows and put a truckie in the top job. A different type of Air Force leader - Los Angeles Times (http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/10/nation/na-schwartz10)

In the Hadden - Cave report, AM Pledger did not come out of it particularly well either. By his own admission, he was not up to the job ( The Nimrod Review - ch 13 para 96 + 102) so it begs the question as to why put a pilot into the top job in the eng and logs world ? I would submit that the HC report backs up my arguement.

My point is that I do not believe for one moment that the RAF has it right with selection from it’s own “fighter mafia” jet jock for the top job - or possibly for that role, of an aircrew mate full stop. I don’t see anywhere in the CAS / AMP job descriptions that you need to have been above average on your F5000, like it does not say you need to be good at shooting for the CGS role on the Army.

Bit of thread creep, but like you said, who am I - as I am looking in.

Food for thought perhaps ?

Justanopinion

2nd Nov 2010, 23:23

C130jbloke

Thanks for the detailed reply - i absolutely get that in the civilian world, you don't have to be a pilot to be the head of an airline.

I just know that in the Royal Air Force's various branches, promotion wise, it's easier to be a big fish in a small pond than the other way round.

The B Word

3rd Nov 2010, 00:43

Willie Walsh, CEO of British Airways, started life as a pilot with Aer Lingus.

Jim French, CEO of Flybe, started off in British Caledonian (although I believe he held a variety of posts from baggage handler upwards!).

Pierre-Henri Gourgeon, CEO of Air France and Air France KLM, was a fighter a pilot and then commercial pilot.

Sorry mate, but there are examples of CEOs that have come from the operations side of the Airline Business that are doing pretty well!

adminblunty

3rd Nov 2010, 01:27

I don't know what the future holds for WSO/WSOPs, however if I was one in Moray, I'd either start studying for a useful qualification and professional membership to help me make the move to Civvy st, or volunteer to learn a useful language (i.e Pashtun, Farsi, Arabic). I assume we are still short of linguists. If the RAF don't keep you the SIS, Security Service, GCHQ, HMGCC will give you a job.

I assume the Army will takeover Kinloss and all the other soon to be vacated RAF bases (Lossie/Halton/Cottesmore/Scampton/Boscombe) which should help the local area housing market. If you want a guranteed posting for your career, I think the only safe bet is Air Cmd.

Admin_Guru

3rd Nov 2010, 06:48

soon to be vacated RAF bases (Lossie/Halton/Cottesmore/Scampton/Boscombe)

Halton? Where did that one come from, likewise Boscombe is leased to QinetiQ as their sole airfield and hardly likely to be an a Army shopping list. There is though much talk in whats left of BAOR regarding moving into Kinloss.

c130jbloke

3rd Nov 2010, 08:40

The B word :

You are correct, but I never said pilots could not do it - by their nature they are extremely analytical so why not. My point was that for the top job(s), you can come from any discipline as long as you have the skills to manage the big picture and not because of historical precedent.

I agree with your example(s), though in the case of Walsh BA took him on because of the job he did with Aer Lingus - ie saving the company by a reorganization of the loss making segments of the company.

Sadly none of this helps the guys up at ISK :(

AQAfive

3rd Nov 2010, 12:30

That would be interesting as the last time I looked they had demolished quite a few of the quarters there. Lots of green lawns, so all of a sudden the simple expedient of taking over an RAF station involves capital outlay as they have to build enough houses for the troops. Mind you they are building locally so maybe we will go back to the old days of hirings.

roush

3rd Nov 2010, 15:05

Maybe try getting your CV out to these guys :rolleyes:

AAI to develop sensors to help UAVs detect and attack submarines and surface warships - Military & Aerospace Electronics (http://www.militaryaerospace.com/index/display/article-display/8878704690/articles/military-aerospace-electronics/volume-21/issue-11/news/news/aai-to-develop-sensors-to-help-uavs-detect-and-attack-submarines-and-surface-warships.html)

EdSett100

3rd Nov 2010, 20:09

There is no doubt that there will be a lot of dis-established posts, at Kinloss and other maritime support units, currently filled by WSOps. However, it would be entirely wrong to assume that only the current incumbents are in line for redundancy.

Manning desks will be directed to remove their pics at the above units thus creating a manning surplus across the whole Service, not simply at Kinloss. All personnel, throughout the Service, in the surplus ranks and trades will be affected. You might be in Vegas, right now, but you are as vulnerable to redundancy as the Kinloss wet man.

You could be a tristar FS eng or ALM, thinking that this has nothing to do with you, but if you have not been anything special in the promotion boards recently you will be in line for the boot to make way for fresh blood from Kinloss.

Maritime WSOps: this is a Service-wide problem, not just maritime. Your expectations/hopes to remain in the RAF are just as valid as every other WSOp, wherever they are. Yes, you can expect to move from Kinloss within the next year or so, if you remain in the RAF.

Good luck, everyone.

Regards
Ed

adminblunty

3rd Nov 2010, 20:40

Admin guru,
The list of soon to be closed bases was speculation on my part, given what's happened and what is likely to happen, i.e a single point of entry to the RAF. I can't see the likes of Halton being retained, however time will tell. There was a SPP study in 2008 which supported closing it, however I understand politics won the day then. I imagine a much reduced RAF will no longer require 2xPhase 1 training units and Cranwell will win the fight to see which one closes. The Army have a habit of taking over former RAF bases i.e Bassingbourn, North Luffenham, Swanton Morley, Bruggen, Innsworth, Stafford, Brawdy, hence my assumption they'll probably take a few more on given the drawdown in Germany. I'm sure the Army planners will look at the facilities/housing available and find some suitable units to move in.

WannabeCrewman

4th Nov 2010, 10:01

Do aircrew ever do tours as FACs/JTACs these days, or is that now strictly the preserve of Rockapes and trained Army/Marine bods? One would have thought that some NCA going spare might come in handy if the Army starts running short, given their knowledge of airmanship, met and communications to a limited extent.

Also heard a rumour that RPAS systems are soon going to be mostly WSOps with a sensor operator background?

Seldomfitforpurpose

4th Nov 2010, 11:40

You could be a tristar FS eng or ALM, thinking that this has nothing to do with you, but if you have not been anything special in the promotion boards recently you will be in line for the boot to make way for fresh blood from Kinloss.

Regards
Ed

The training system is currently full to overflowing, add to that the cost of getting rid of "qualified" people simply to re train "non qualified" people then you will quickly see that what you suggest, just like the whole WSOp system, is sadly nothing more than a pipe dream.

Petasus

4th Nov 2010, 13:16

EdSett, I'm not doubting your knowledge and I assume being at Kinloss you're pretty much as informed as anyone else up there - but the statement about the promotion boards doesn't hold water for many WSOps. A large number of WSOp Sgts have yet to appear on the promotion boards due to the time bar - how do these guys/girls stand?

I would doubt that potential redundancies would be solely decided on promotion board results, although I'm happy to be corrected.

teeteringhead

4th Nov 2010, 15:18

Petasus ... it was ad hoc Reverse Promotion Boards in the past and may be again. And I guess there's no time-bar for those!

sargs

4th Nov 2010, 15:43

And I guess there's no time-bar for those!

Unless you want to moan that you haven't been in long enough to be sufficiently bad to be considered.......

The Old Fat One

4th Nov 2010, 16:16

As has been posted elsewhere, predicating redundancy purely on performance (promotion boards or annual reports) is contrary to the spirit of UK employment law.

Nowadays all public sector employers (including the MOD) stick strictly to the laws and guidelines laid down in legislation.

I'm out now, so no longer current, but in the past when a redundancy tranche was announced, the criteria was detailed at the same time...usually with the caveat that voluntary quotas will be filled first.

Whilst the terms of redundancy may change, the process is unlikely to change......much.

biddedout

4th Nov 2010, 16:52

Surely, if there is a surplus of qualified aircrew, the RAF should immediately slap a ban on pilot recruitment until it is sorted out.
Most AEOp and Navs could easily be trained up as pilots particularly for the non pointly fleets. Most would have the aptitude and the need to pass Crandits should not be used as a way to delay and block applicants who have already demonstrated their skils in the airborne environment.

Fast track them and ensure that pilot is open to all as a realistic option.

These are exceptional times Its time to tear up the old rule book and concentrate on getting well qualified dedicated professionals into appropriate alternative positions, quickly and cost effectively without wasting yet more taxpayer's money. These people are already there, the taxpayer has invested a lot in them. Retrain them! Flying a modern multi engined aircraft is just not that difficult.

If the RAF is talking redundancy, then rule number one is to first seek suitable alternative positions. Until that is done, recruitment should stop.

Pontius Navigator

4th Nov 2010, 17:36

biddedout, there was a nav cross-over system a few year ago but that was to address a pilot shortage. With the cancellation if the Nimrod, draw down on C130, withdrawal of the Harrier etc that is probably not the case now.

To stop recruiting for a year is not the answer either as there needs to be a range of recruits of a given age. If you re-tread all 25-30 year olds you would increase the average age and create an age gap that would bite in future years.

c130jbloke

4th Nov 2010, 17:37

Nice idea but it will never work.

I remember a lecture way back about the Royal Navy. During it, the subject of manning came up and the presenter ( a 1* IIRC ) stated that one of the biggest mistakes the RN made was to halt all recruiting in the mid 1990's. The effect was to create a demographic / rank " back hole " which was working it's way through the system and its negative effects would be felt for 20 odd years. I stand by to be corrected by the Navy types :uhoh:

Reduce, yes - but to stop is not a good idea as we will always need young blood. Sounds like a bitter pill to swallow. As for the x - over you still have the problem of X chasing Y slots and you have to open the competition up to all, otherwise it's an HR train wreck and the D word will get wheeled out very quickly.

biddedout

4th Nov 2010, 17:59

Fair points, but I am just thinking about a relatively small number to ease the overall overburden. Not everyone would be interested anyway. I don't know how things are these days, but I just thin since the Airforce is now run by accountants and speaks HR, then it's time to play to the civillian rules and look at downsizing and potential redundancy the way it would be dealt with in a big company. The Air Force knows its AE's and Navs very well and in the case of AEops it is time to drop all the Officer first bo@@ocks. If there are a small number of vacancies, put some the expensive, highly trained known quantities in the front seats as well as the back whenever possible. They will cope, its just a matter of training.

I can see the problems though, there is only room for one Harrier pilot and asociated baggage in each airline and we already have one. Its going to take a long time to mop up the surplus.

VinRouge

4th Nov 2010, 18:04

I think the RAFs overburden of pilots is going to sort itself out pretty damn quickly.

The MOD should be asking themselves how they intend to keep in the large numbers of weary and experienced people in from flocking to the emergency exit once they are offered optional redundancy on top of their full gratuity and pension.

BBC News - Airline pilot shortage facing UK, union Balpa warns (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11691204)

I think BALPA should know its pretty bl00dy obvious where the pilots will come from to fill this looming gap.

The posters know this. And the problem isnt just looming in the UK.

Google "Lack of Pilots" and you will see it is a global phenomenon.

Justanopinion

4th Nov 2010, 19:01

C130jbloke - Corrected by an RAF source on behalf of the RN.

Source Defence Professionals in the UK and France (http://www.dasa.mod.uk/modintranet/dp/index.php?c=4&s=1&l=english&m=english) - the graph outflow reflects the last round of culling.....

Inflow and outflow of Naval Service officers and other ranks, 1993/94 to 2003/04

http://www.dasa.mod.uk/modintranet/dp/images/99a.gif

c130jbloke

4th Nov 2010, 19:47

JAO,

I see it, but what is the ratio of Officers / ORs within the graph ? The 94 - 96 intake bars look thin enough to have not contained any enlisted personnel at all........

Still not a lot when you consider the strength of the RN at that time - 50 000+ ?

Once again, if I am wrong feel free to correct :O

Justanopinion

4th Nov 2010, 20:40

C130jbloke -

During it, the subject of manning came up and the presenter ( a 1* IIRC ) stated that one of the biggest mistakes the RN made was to halt all recruiting in the mid 1990's.

Click on the link on my previous post for the OR graph -

Pontius Navigator

4th Nov 2010, 20:55

justanopinion, fascinating graphs, especiall the rank profiles. A quick eyeball seems to show the Army officers get their majority before the other Services and the RAF has flt lt long after the RN. In the Army the default rank appears to be major after 13 years with no captains visible.

That accounts for some inter-service willy waving with lt col thinking they are more important than we think they are :}

Seldomfitforpurpose

4th Nov 2010, 21:25

Most AEOp and Navs could easily be trained up as pilots particularly for the non pointly fleets.

Did you ever wonder why they ended up as AEOp's and Nav's :rolleyes:

c130jbloke

4th Nov 2010, 21:42

Best I go find that 1* then :ugh:

davejb

4th Nov 2010, 23:39

Did you ever wonder why they ended up as AEOp's and Nav's

Well in my case it was 'cos I eat peas off my knife, and c0kced up my interview at Biggin (partly due to a misunderstanding at one point, but primarily because the only paper I read at the time was the Sporting Life which, sadly, didn't have much coverage of US politics other than to offer odds on Jimmy Carter).

It's not just about whether you can pole an aircraft around, it's either about getting the right sort of basic chap who can then be moulded for future stardom etc, or having the ability to 'manoeuvre' your hands around at the bar - both seem to be considered important.

Of course, if you actually decide that it's okay to recruit the majority of pilots for their pole waggling skills, and to (perhaps) just ensure sufficient good eggs enter as officers to provide the future leadership, then there's no reason why NCOs can't fly aircraft.

In fact I'm sure you could produce posters for pilot applicants that promised they'd be LAC's on exiting training with the prospect of corporal's tapes after 5 years for those who really shine and there'd still be 100 applicants for every bang seat.

Dave

muttywhitedog

4th Nov 2010, 23:41

I trust nobody at Kinloss is wearing a growbag these days....

Seldomfitforpurpose

4th Nov 2010, 23:49

Well in my case it was 'cos I eat peas off my knife,
Dave

In my case it was simply because I was no where good enough, I know and accept that, others would do well to cotton on to that as well :ok:

Seldomfitforpurpose

4th Nov 2010, 23:53

I trust nobody at Kinloss is wearing a growbag these days....

Getting over not quite cutting it seems to have left quite a bad taste :rolleyes:

Easy Street

5th Nov 2010, 00:02

Of course, if you actually decide that it's okay to recruit the majority of pilots for their pole waggling skills, and to (perhaps) just ensure sufficient good eggs enter as officers to provide the future leadership, then there's no reason why NCOs can't fly aircraft.

My bold - pilots are not recruited just for their pole waggling skills. They have to pole waggle (ooh-er) whilst considering higher commanders' intent, making decisions on ROE, prioritising between conflicting taskings, etc, often whilst outside communication range of their 1-up.

I know that Cpls and Sgts do all of the above (apart from pole-waggling) as team and section leaders in the Army. However a single aircraft is at least the equivalent of a platoon in terms of firepower, area of influence, and potential for scrutiny if screwups occur - and platoons are commanded by officers. The fact that the AAC use NCO aircrew is a reflection on a different command structure whereby the aircraft can be considered to be under command of an officer on the ground.

I agree on one point though, which is about the number of 'eggs' that we currently test to find the 'good eggs' that will rise ever upwards. We train far too many aircrew; hence we end up with aircrew officers all over the place in instructional or made-up staff posts. We should be bolder in identifying the 'stars' early and getting them moving up, leaving the 'others' stable on the front line and giving productive service rather than attempting to 'broaden' them in the name of career progression. Perhaps something like the Navy's twin-track officer progression?

VinRouge

5th Nov 2010, 00:06

We have it already. Its called PA.

Easy Street

5th Nov 2010, 01:36

VR,

But you can only get PA after spending 15-20 years 'pretending' to be interested in a career. For right or wrong, in the early days of an FJ career, those who express no interest in career development are quickly put out to grass to make room for new 'eggs' in the 'good egg' hunt. PA have historically also been amongst the first guys to get the boot when more room is needed.

Seldomfitforpurpose

5th Nov 2010, 09:03

Quite a chip your shoulder there hey? Try cloning yourself to something that doesn't get rid of efluent!

Chip..........moi.........care to expand miss :p:p:p:p:p

teeteringhead

5th Nov 2010, 09:49

But you can only get PA after spending 15-20 years 'pretending' to be interested in a career. ... aha! So it's back to the days of the Supplementary List and 38 year old Fg Offs (Nah mate, don't take the B Exam or you'll get a ground tour AND be made Mess Sec)

Seldomfitforpurpose

5th Nov 2010, 16:28

Fighter Controller? Why on earth would I want to be a Fighter Controller when I am perfectly happy being an ALM:ok:

diginagain

5th Nov 2010, 17:04

The fact that the AAC use NCO aircrew is a reflection on a different command structure whereby the aircraft can be considered to be under command of an officer on the ground.

Beg to differ (I was going to put it less politely, as would AJ in his days as an NCO pilot).

davejb

5th Nov 2010, 17:49

If I might make 2 comments...

EGDG - As far as I can see SFFP said 'because I was nowhere near good enough' which would appear, at least to me, to be a rather humble position to take, especially considering he made it as an ALM which basically means he passed most of the selection process...he failed (if he went for pilot/nav, some go straight for NCO) on officer like qualities and/or leadership. Suggesting he has a chip on his shoulder suggests, to me at least, that the chip is actually on yours.

Easy Street - J***** H C***t, you need to get out more and see what NCOs are capable of, that's the most arrogant load of complete twaddle I ever heard. On a multi crew aircraft like Nimrod (where we mere mortals tended to go) NCA would be a significant part of the loop, fully aware of ROE's (and unlike SOME officers quite capable of deciding whether we were complying with them or not without having to ask Mummy) and quite capable of making decisions. MAEOP's terms of service include the requirement to shepherd and guide junior officers - an acknowledgement of what any decent officer knows, ie that an NCO or WO with significant years under their belts has a bloody good grasp of the RAF and their job, and is more than capable of making a part time officer (you know, the ones who leave by age 38) look a prat if required.

In fact the realisation of the above leads a fair number of us to **** off into civvy street where we tend to do rather well, last time I bothered checking my 12 man NCA course produced at least one FJ station commander, I recently spent 10 mins in the pub chatting as a result of a chance encounter to a fireman... sorry, now a Squadron boss.... another is a civvy airline pilot... ALL people who were, in my view, incorrectly filtered by OASC. Others go to civvy St and tend to do rather well.

Sorry to be so blunt and aggressive, but that was the most patronising load of drivel I've read on here in a long time. I'll back my decision making skills and intelligence against yours any day - as an ex NCA I am THAT confident.

Dave

davejb

5th Nov 2010, 18:46

SFFP has in the past expressed some opinions, many have annoyed me so - if annoyed enough - I replied to say,
what he posted here did not deserve your comment.

Yes I'm the past, I have a decent brain, I'm not afraid of decision making, and when it all goes south I acknowlege it with a self deprecating joke for the most part.

I'm not the best guy on the planet by a long chalk, but I don't think I'm all that bad overall. I consider your post unworthy frankly, as I was in support of NCOs becoming pilots and objecting to those who seemed to believe that NCOs wre incapable of making difficult decisions or handling the technical side.

Or to put it another way,
you muppet.

Dave

davejb

5th Nov 2010, 19:09

Agreed.
Dave

BEagle

5th Nov 2010, 23:36

...hence we end up with aircrew officers all over the place in instructional or made-up staff posts...Surely those days are long gone?

Easy Street

6th Nov 2010, 23:14

BEags,

The UK-based HQs have indeed been downsizing over the past few years. The made-up staff posts can be found in the various Expeditionary Air Wings and Group (nothing like writing useless service papers in a dusty office in the desert to enhance your promotion prospects!). And the reason why we keep needing new pilots to be trained is that we post guys away from the front line after only 2.5 to 3 years - generally to be QFIs! Self-licking lollipop is a phrase that springs to mind.

davejb,

I fully acknowledge the role played by NCO aircrew as members of the airborne team, especially in the maritime role. However you would (rightly) expect the officers to carry the can if you (for example) torpedoed the wrong submarine. You can educate me here - were there ever any situations where you could have released a weapon without the consent of one of the officers on board?

My point was that assets as "strategic" as aircraft should be held accountable at least the same rank level as an army platoon, which means being under the command of an officer. By "strategic" here I mean scarce, wide-ranging and high-impact. In the days of the NCO pilot, aircraft were not scarce in the modern sense, and individual airframes had nothing like the destructive or intelligence-gathering powers of today's platforms.

And finally, with tongue firmly in cheek, if pilots could be NCOs, why couldn't rearcrew be SACs? There are plenty of SACs out there with highly specialised technical training, after all!

diginagain

7th Nov 2010, 04:57

And finally, with tongue firmly in cheek, if pilots could be NCOs, why couldn't rearcrew be SACs? There are plenty of SACs out there with highly specialised technical training, after all!

Quite right. The Corps have been doing it for years, saves a bundle. Although the scheme to employ Corporal pilots wasn't popular, it raised a few eyebrows when two of us would pitch-up at an RAF station in our borrowed Lynx.

Neptunus Rex

7th Nov 2010, 05:29

I once got a 'lift' from Ballykelly to Aldergrove in an AAC Sioux. The pilot was a Corporal - in the Catering Corps! Top pilot.

Pontius Navigator

7th Nov 2010, 06:18

were there ever any situations where you could have released a weapon without the consent of one of the officers on board?

No, the pilots controlled the bomb doors - end of story.

On the V-bombers control of the bomb doors could be given to the Nav Rad but only with the consent of the pilots. In fact control wasn't so much as given to the Nav Rad as to the computer.

AFAIK it is similar in the fast-jets, only one weapons selector panel and only one jettison switch - certainly in the F4.

Ray Dahvectac

7th Nov 2010, 09:37

However you would (rightly) expect the officers to carry the can if you (for example) torpedoed the wrong submarine. You can educate me here - were there ever any situations where you could have released a weapon without the consent of one of the officers on board?

No, the pilots controlled the bomb doors - end of story.

That's certainly the case PN, though it's fair to say that I as a wet man, or davejb as a dry man could cause a weapon to be dropped in the wrong place or on a friendly target. No, we couldn't actually push the button from where we sat but if the intent had been there ...

PTC REMF

7th Nov 2010, 09:59

My point was that assets as "strategic" as aircraft should be held accountable at least the same rank level as an army platoon, which means being under the command of an officer. By "strategic" here I mean scarce, wide-ranging and high-impact. In the days of the NCO pilot, aircraft were not scarce in the modern sense, and individual airframes had nothing like the destructive or intelligence-gathering powers of today's platforms.

I would think that the SNCO AH pilots/ commanders would beg to differ. There is no justification for NCA to be SNCOs, this is a WW2 POW legacy, the same way that there is no justification for commissioned pilots, the AAC seem to cope quite well with both and the RAF seemed to cope quite well during WW2 with both.

day1-week1

7th Nov 2010, 10:11

Bit in the Sunday Express about redundancies being announced within the the next six weeks,with Kinloss being mentioned in particular. Unlikely but not unimaginable. Most people I've spoke to seems to think it'll take six months before anything would happen, personally I think it will be much quicker than that. Desk O's spend most of their time effectively grading people, getting to know the wheat from the chaff, compiling lists of A-graders and 'waste of rations'. I bet most Desk O's could have produced their lists of 'those to go' within hours of SDSR, probably as quick as it took to open the excel file and print it off.

Pontius Navigator

7th Nov 2010, 11:03

That's certainly the case PN, though it's fair to say that I as a wet man, or davejb as a dry man could cause a weapon to be dropped in the wrong place or on a friendly target. No, we couldn't actually push the button from where we sat but if the intent had been there ...

Very true but would you have risked an interview with Mick Muttit or Derek Murgatroyd afterwards? :}

getsometimein

7th Nov 2010, 11:09

davejb

7th Nov 2010, 12:09

No,
no NCO in a Nimrod could drop a weapon, you had to be an officer, and that's because it was set up that way.... had Nimrod crews been constituted of 12 Air Marshalls and one SAC steward then you'd have had to be a 3 * to drop a torpedo.... a more sensible question is 'does the need to drop weapons preclude the use of NCO navs/pilots' - and the answer is still no.

As some have mentioned WW2 then the destructive capability allowed to WW2 NCO bomber crews compared quite favourably with that of the Nimrod, there didn't seem to be any overrriding concern back then... and I'd argue that the modern NCO (aircrew or groundcrew) is proably rather better educated on the whole, and has a better idea of what they are there to achieve, how it fits into the overall plan, etc. so is probably more capable of making sensible decisions on engagement.

On Nimrods we killed subs and ships (for the most part) in the simulator - the lead dry and lead wet, at least, would have no hesitation in butting into the conversation if they did not agree with what the crew were about to do.... to be perfectly honest we'd have considered 'who had the release button' a fairly trivial detail.

Rear crew SAC - you'd probably still attract a percentage of likely NCA candidates, at 18 years old the flying is the attraction for many. Whether you'd be able to retain them is another matter, I very much doubt you'd get the vast resources of experience on squadrons (if we still had any) that we do (just) have these days, once the initial glamour of reeking of hydraulic fluid had passed. I don't know if you'd get sufficient candidates who could pass the selection process, but you might well - especially if you don't want anything like as many as you once did. There's more sense behind this idea than that something about a commission makes you magically better at decision making.

Dave

Very true but would you have risked an interview with Mick Muttit or Derek Murgatroyd afterwards?

- Ah, they were pussycats! I flew for a while with Mick as he headed for retirement and he was the nicest bloke you could hope to meet...annoy Spanners though and it'd be a different matter!

Pontius Navigator

7th Nov 2010, 12:36

Derek too, however when our lead wet was promoted Mr M took him to one side for a full day briefing on the rights, wrongs and responsibilities of a MACR.

Neptunus Rex

7th Nov 2010, 14:24

The Captain of a MPA can sometimes be a position that is probably unique in any military setting, in that he can give orders to a vastly senior naval officer commanding another unit.
Dark Blue did not like that one bit, but how we enjoyed it.

day1-week1

7th Nov 2010, 14:34

getsometimein

I agree that nobody will find themselves selling the big issue in six weeks time and the timelines will be much longer, however the view that manning are floundering around under the weight of situation and will take months and months to come up with the solution is IMHO very wide of the mark. I think lists will be out in fairly short order. Whether that a trawl for volunteers or more or a mixture of offers and outright P45's remains to be seen.

Pontius Navigator

7th Nov 2010, 15:09

The rounds I remember had calls for volunteers from specific groups, types, trades, length of service etc with the possibility of compulsory redundancies later should the requisite number of volunteers not be forthcoming.

At the same time compulsory notices were issued to specific groups along the same lines but different from the volunteer groups. For instance some gp capt were made redundant but there had been no call for volunteers.

In the first group non-FJ navs could volunteer but none were made compulsorily redundant at the first call.

The timescales were in the order or 12-18 months which given the time for resettlement courses, terminal leave and annual leave make the 12 months really quite short.

getsometimein

7th Nov 2010, 18:38

I agree that nobody will find themselves selling the big issue in six weeks time and the timelines will be much longer, however the view that manning are floundering around under the weight of situation and will take months and months to come up with the solution is IMHO very wide of the mark. I think lists will be out in fairly short order. Whether that a trawl for volunteers or more or a mixture of offers and outright P45's remains to be seen.

Dont know if its my place to publish internal emails... But dont expect anyone leaving on a redundency package before April 12...

Biggus

7th Nov 2010, 18:59

Perhaps a little less speculation, and a few more hard facts, are required.

I saw at work a few days ago a document, I believe it was a DIN, with some information on future potential redundancies post SDSR. It was split into separate sections for Civil servants and the military.

I believe it said that single service UINs would be issued "within 6 months". In the now obliqatory Q&A section it stated that redundancies would occur in three tranches, and was aimed to be completed by 2014.

I will try and remember tomorrow to check the title of the document, but it is widely available if you look, no doubt also on line - it is not a state secret. While the contents of this document may be overtaken by events, it shows the inital intent of the MOD - hopefully reducing speculation.

As to how quickly desk officers will have anything out for public consumption. Well, it will be easy for them to buy themselves some breathing space. If, as a desk officer, I think I will need to lose say 100 from trade X, then I can advertise 40 required in tranche 1 straight away. This won't embarrass me if my figure of 100 is not too accurate, and buy me a breathing space until tranche 2 is advertised to actually sort everything out properly.

Pontius Navigator

7th Nov 2010, 19:40

Biggus, is this the one? [ARCHIVED CONTENT] Page not found (http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/AboutDefence/CorporatePublications/PersonnelPublications/Pensions/Booklets/ArmedForcesRedundancyScheme2010.htm) which is the link to DIN 188 which is actually available in the internet or

http://www.nff.org.uk/pdfdocs/sdsr_regulararmedforcescompulsoryredundancyprogramme.pdf which says that 188 is only on the intranet but is available here. It does say in the heading Not to be communicated to anyone outside HM Services without Authority.

http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/33B5F9BA-FFEC-4922-A793-48D1A211A130/0/20101019DIN201001188ArmedForcesRedundancyScheme2010Provision s.pdf The detail is both odd why can you apply for compulsory redundancy?

The various links on each of the documents above seem to work as advertised allowing you to drill through to each relevant document.

Biggus

7th Nov 2010, 20:03

PN,

Your second link certainly seems to contain most of the same data. The end of para 2 on page 1 refers to single service DINs being published in "aprroximately 6 months" and Q9 of the Q&As refers to the 3 tranches and 2014....

PFMG

24th Nov 2010, 15:44

Any update to what the future might hold?

36 man crews on Rivet Joint or 12 on a Sentinel? Could be a way of securing a few jobs although it might be a little cramped. Otherwise the future appears a bit bleak.

Anyone heard what the crew composition of the future tanker might be?

iRaven

24th Nov 2010, 18:34

Any update to what the future might hold?

I heard about 2x Wg Cdrs scurrying around Air Cmd trying to sort this out this week - looking at all sorts of posts and cross-overs. I guess a plan will be out by Xmas?

Still we have heard "It'll be over by Christmas" before!

iRaven

Willard Whyte

24th Nov 2010, 18:51

RJ might be an option for some, but will Sentinel be looking for many people given its limited life?

Anyone speak Korean? Could be a clincher.

The English Passenger

24th Nov 2010, 20:09

Sorry to bear bad news,

But RJ will not be there for anyone until 2014 at the earliest. All the PICs are full for the slots between now and arrival of UK frames, so don't get your hopes up.

:(

Seldomfitforpurpose

24th Nov 2010, 20:47

PFMG,

If last week's brief was anything to go on Sentinel is a complete non starter as well.

There were enough AEop folk at last weeks WSOp Conf so there should be some pretty up to date gen available.

TwoTunnels

24th Nov 2010, 22:06

I believe that there are no spaces on 5(AC) Sqn for WSOps. Think they are already over their 5 slots at the moment. Not a safe bet anyway...no future after 2015.

Widger

25th Nov 2010, 23:48

I believe Tescos may be recruiting. Sorry.....I know it is not very funny but...take off the blinkers look around and take stock......smell the coffee beans!

Grumpy106

26th Nov 2010, 09:38

Have to agree with Widger - why do WSOps/WSOs from Nimrod feel that the RAF owes them a job on another platform at someone else's expense? If they closed an ABM Unit they wouldn't expect to take over some Air Traffic roles so why should maritime trained WSOps be able to bump people from Sentry, Sentinel or RJ posts? I have sympathy for your plight, but no-one owes you a living these days, sorry.

Jayand

26th Nov 2010, 13:55

Sandy parts we all know that aint going to happen, the training burden to remove a qualified person from the front line and replace them with an untrained, unproven in that field person is much too large to contemplate.
The axe will fall heavily on those at Kinloss, as widger says wake up!

EdSett100

26th Nov 2010, 16:01

jayand:the training burden to remove a qualified person from the front line and replace them with an untrained, unproven in that field person is much too large to contemplate.
Like what we've been doing for years.

Highly competent and experienced people are constantly being (re)moved from their posts, for a variety of reasons: retirement, forced posting, voluntary posting, medical/compassionate issues, etc. The associated sqn/flt/sect then sorts itself out and a new guy appears from the OCU at approx the same time.

So, while the OCU student places are constantly full, as we all know they are (across the WSOp cadre) people will continue to leave the front line to make room for the new blood.

Here's an example of how a waste of oxygen WSOp in England can find himself redundant in the near future:

Pre SDSR, the WSOp deskies decided to post a solid, competent operator from a rotary sqn in summer 2011 and replace him with an OCU graduate (standard manning practice), while waste of oxygen guy continues cruising in his comfort zone.

Post SDSR, the deskies now decide to keep solid guy on said sqn and boot out the waste of oxygen. At no time does the quality or inexperience of the OCU graduate come into the thinking of the deskie. The current OCU studes are mostly abbos from Cranwell, but within the next 12 months, that incoming stream will be greatly reduced and the WSOPs from Kinloss will fill the OCUs. The deskies will continue to post/move experienced people off the sqns, just like they always have done, except they now have the opportunity to get rid of the deadwood while the OCUs are full of studes.

Ed

RandomBlah

26th Nov 2010, 16:19

I am disgusted by the attitude of some on this thread. Having worked with many of the Wsop contingency in some not very nice places in the last decade they have always produced the goods- irrespective of the demands placed upon them. Now this particular section of the RAF appear to be in the sights of being made redundant and are rightly-so are concerned. Several peoples reaction to this appears to be "tough luck" (i'm alright and thats all that matters). Whatever happened to playing for your mates? Some on this thread should hang their heads in shame. With that sort of mentality it is you that should be given a P45- we do not need people like that.

Joe Black

26th Nov 2010, 16:53

Randomblah/Edsett,

I completely agree with both your previous posts. Yes, the attitude of SOME is shocking and it does disgust me. Edsett has, for me, underlined the way this situation should and hopefully will be sorted.

why do WSOps/WSOs from Nimrod feel that the RAF owes them a job on another platform at someone else's expense? If they closed an ABM Unit they wouldn't expect to take over some Air Traffic roles so why should maritime trained WSOps be able to bump people from Sentry, Sentinel or RJ posts?

Reference the above; we are all WSOps/WSOs and if there are a few useless operators(and there are) who think because they are on an operational platform that they are safe from the big R, then think again. This will be across the entire WSOp cadre.

Joe.