Quarter of RAF trainee pilots to be sacked

[Turkeyslapper]

To keep the though put going, it makes more sense to make every Navigator (or whatever they call them now) on SH redundant and replace them with a pilot.

I agree with this statement and I am not even in the RAF...You guys have navigators on SH??? WTF? Can't pilots read maps over there in the UK? :E

Turkey

[warty99]

AngryDave said:
Out of service date will be Sep 2012, so another 18 months in a blue suit although there is no plan what to do with those affected for those 18 months. Just enough time to wait and see people complete the course you've been choped off. If you want out earlier, VW is an option but there is no incentive to do that.

I may be absolutely wrong about this, but the last I heard recruitment for pilots was planned to reopen in financial year 2012/13. If true, and AD's out-of-service date is true, that puts us in a situation where pilots who have been made redundant are still on the payroll in 2012 while new recruits are already coming in to replace them.

Now, I may be wrong about this as well, but I'm pretty sure one of the main factors when you make someone redundant is that the job itself is disappearing - you can't just make someone redundant and then hire someone else to do the same job.

If we're hanging on to trainee pilots for another 18 months before we boot them out, then taking in new trainee pilots in 14 months (ish), I can't see how redundancy is legal.

Lots of ifs, buts and maybes in that one, but that's the first thing I'd be clarifying in a discreet call to an employment lawyer ...

[bandoe]

Feel very sorry for these guys.

[teeteringhead]

Lots of good words about redundancy laws - I've heard similar from MoD Civil Servants - who, remember, are losing 25% of their number.

But, and it's a big but, government doing the redundancies ..... government makes the laws. Last week (with prisoners' voting rights) Parliament (ie government) for first time puts up tentative two fingers to ECHR ....

...go figure :(

[MrFlibble]

c130jbloke said:
Does this mean that every student pilot is working under the stress of not knowing whether they will make it or not ?

Is it just me, but this looks like one hell of a flight safety risk in addition to the utter HR disaster it already is.


To answer this one point - although I dont know about the Phase 3 trainees, I've been told that everyone on EFT who has a solo sortie to complete will now be ghosted with a QFI, until everyone is informed whether they're staying or not.

[Climebear]

Part XI of the Employment Right Act 1996 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/part/XI) details the legal position of redundancy.

The Act also details many other rights relating to employment. However, our cunning legislature decided when drafting the act that not all of these rights should apply to the Armed Forces (or other groups). The elements of the act that apply to the Armed Forces are detailed at Section 192 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/section/192) para (2) - this does not apply 'Part XI - Redundancy payments etc.' to the Armed Forces. (Similarly they don't apply to others in 'Crown employment' (Section 191 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/section/191))).

[davejb]

Two points,

1) Anyone facing redundancy should certainly look at the legal side of this - given so many are involved then commonsense suggests they get together and hire a small team of lawyers between them. It needn't be expensive, per capita, to discover whether or not you can vastly improve the package as you leave. (The RAF will dispose of you, no lawyer is going to make them keep you on, but there's probably a sizeable difference between the resettlement package, redundancy payout etc that the RAF want to hand out and the one that a savvy lawyer will manage to extract).

2) It's down to aircraft numbers, ultimately - argue all you like, but with an RAF that's got less aircraft than Airfix had last time they went into recievership there's no way we need the pilot numbers - or the Air ranks above them. No point in angst on pilot, WSO/Op, groundcrew numbers if the aircraft aren't there. The complaint should actually be about the way we have been cut to below effective strength, while it takes ever longer to resurrect capability. (Cameron probably imagines it's like WW2 where you could process a guy from civvy street to a Spitfire cockpit in months, unlike the years it actually takes).

My condolences to those who made it to flying training, as somebody (wisely) filtered out by OASC to be mere NCO aircrew once over I know how hard a blow it must be to succeed only to have the rug snatched out from under your feet.

To those posting with a groundcrew hat on - aircrew are selected on the basis of their egos, in part, the steady types are guided towards more mundane and useful <g> trades.... you can't select on a model based on Tom Cruise then expect an Alan Titchmarsh response to something like this.

Dave

[fruitbat]

For what it's worth our Pilot Recruitment Manager at British Airways has today said they are actively looking at recruiting Forces pilots. Roadshows have already been held at some bases and more are planned.

Once the current type rated requirement has been lifted expect to see it opened up to all. Currently BA need 140 new pilots this financial year.

[Prangster]

How do you lay a whole airforce to rest RIP RAF

[cazatou]

davejb

It is not the RAF that is behind this situation - it is HMG.

Equally the RAF does not have any money of its own - its budget is determined by HMG.

In the Spring of 1939 Conscription was introduced for single Males aged 20-22 years. Naturally my Father, who was 25 (and married with a pregnant wife), was one of the first to be conscripted. No compensation was paid.

HMG will determine levels of compensation and will, if necessary, change the Law to suit its purposes.

[xenolith]

An Opposition Day Motion:

MILITARY COVENANT

Edward Miliband
]Mr Jim Murphy
Mr Douglas Alexander
John Healey
Ms Rosie Winterton



That this House supports establishing in law the definition of the Military Covenant, in so doing fulfilling the Prime Minister’s pledge of 25 June 2010 to have ‘a new Military Covenant that’s written into the law of the land’; believes that this commitment should not be diluted or sidestepped; and further supports service charities’ and families’ calls for a legally-binding Military Covenant which defines the principles that should guide Government action on all aspects of defence policy.

The selection of the matters to be debated this day has been made by the Leader of the Opposition (Standing Order No. 14(2)).
Debate may continue until 7.00 pm

The motion was defeated.

[davejb]

Caz,
yes, I never imagined otherwise - equally the redundancy terms from the RAF will originate with government also. That it is HMG driving the cut in aircraft numbers is also a given, although it is arguable that mismanagement of funds has occurred within the services as well as within HMG and CS, ultimately leading to the requirement for the pain we now experience.

My main complaint re-Cameron is that the SDSR was hurried and botched, we should have looked at what was essential to our national defence, then decided what to keep and what to axe - and I don't think for one moment this is what actually happened.

Xenolith - given the opposition did nothing when they had the chance, I regard this as poltical points scoring on a topic that should be above party politics, therefore nobody emerges from the lack of debate with a shred of honour intact.

Politicians have never been trustworthy, it's about time we had some sort of national testing for common sense and coopted the top 100 scorers into parliament... 100 would be plenty, why the hell we have over 600 of the weasels is beyond my understanding.

Dave

[MTOW]

Not as off thread as some might first think, but can someone explain to me why all government programmes except foreign aid were cut?

What is it about foreign aid that makes it the exception?

[captain_gash]

Just a thought, those told they will be made redundant will leave in Sep 12, and the RAF are not recruiting again until 2013. If the guy was in the age bracket what would stop him leaving and then walking straight back into the careers office a few months later? "look at me", quick refresher on whatever and hes / shes back in the game. Provided said person really wanted to join such an organisation as disappointing as ours having just been shafted by them. Difficult choice i guess.:confused:

[Wig Wag]

If the guy was in the age bracket what would stop him leaving and then walking straight back into the careers office a few months later? "look at me", quick refresher on whatever and hes / shes back in the game.

Thou art a humorist.

The answer is the only thing that might stop that is age limits. I hope someone tries it, succeeds and gets their pay backdated. :D

[Pontius Navigator]

I said this earlier. It could certainly apply to your 19 year old direct entrant. Two years out, if they still wanted in, would be of benefit. They might also return on re-entrant terms with a minimal IOT but they will need to keep their uniforms as they won't get a new issue :)

[tezzer]

As I stood in my garden this afternoon, in the sun, under a lovely blue sky I watched a Tucano, doing what they do, and wondered what exactly the motivation for the presumably student pilot was, as he awaited his fate, chop or not chop.

So sad.

Once this country was run by Lions.

[Kreuger flap]

Phew............are you lot still discussing this? I think some of you need to move away from your monitor and take a breather. Its sad and all that for those concerned but it doesn't even affect 99% of you so why bother going over and over and over the same ground. Let it go until there is some firm news.

[tucumseh]

This is the "Just in Time" principle applied to aircrew.

I see on another thread Investors in People has been binned. Now we know where they were posted.

[Miles Magister]

Would that be the 'Just in time' or 'Just too late' principle?

[peter272]

It'll be just like the film Independence Day.

when an emergency comes, they'll ask for drunken crop-sprayers with Falklands Experience and allocate them an F35 or F22 that they'll fly brilliantly.

How hard can that be?

[teeteringhead]

drunken crop-sprayers with Falklands Experience ... when can I start (I might need to learn crop-spraying...)

[Runaway Gun]

The problem with THAT Hollywood scenario, is that you need more aircraft than pilots.

[cazatou]

tezzer

Your post 273

The Quote was " Lions led by Donkeys".

[GrahamO]

Back to facts again......

Has anyone seen or generated a set of charts for each platform showing the current number of pilots currently qualified, and then the number qualifying added on a year by year basis?

This would allow people to compare how many pilots there are today, next year, the year after etc etc, assuming pass/fail rates remained consistent and allowing for the loss of irreplaceable aircraft, and for retiring pilots.

It seems to me that this kind of data is necessary to have a sensible discussion ...

If for example, current (graduating) training rates allowing for the current rate of retirement, and allowing for the occasional aircraft being u/s, results in a glut of pilots in 2 years time such that the number exceeds the available seats in the aircraft by 100% then there would be less argument if the difference were 1%.

Does anyone actually know the numbers involved on a timeline base ?

Or is everyone assuming the numbers don't look so obviously out of whack that something had to be done ?

[NothingMuch]

Not quite the full details you're asking for but I can tell you that there are exactly 200 students in pools 1 & 2. So that's all the pilots currently on IOT (including those on E Sqn) or in the early stages of EFT.

[Greengrass]

How do I explain to my son who wants so desperately to follow in his fathers footsteps that hes wasting his time . He has no other desire than to serve his country and be the best godammmn fighter pilot in the world
Consequently he is now researching how to obtain American Citizenship and join USAF to fly F18s off carriers and who can blame him !

[Wholigan]

and be the best godammmn fighter pilot in the world



Now that I've retired there's a vacancy for that post!

;)

[Greengrass]

Ahhhemm I said follow in his fathers footsteps Do I need to start asking my wife questions ??

[spectre150]

join USAF to fly F18s off carriers

well good luck with that :p

[Mr C Hinecap]

He has no other desire than to serve his country and be the best godammmn fighter pilot in the world


Given that he appears prepared to give up the former to achieve the latter, that statement appears to be only 50% accurate.

[Non Emmett]

When the Americans pull out of Afghanistan, given their continuing financial deficits, aren't they likely to face big cuts in their military? Sorry for thread creep but surely the American military aren't going to remain immune from these dreadful cuts we are now seeing ?

There are suggestions here that civilians don't know and don't care about the RAF cuts but there is much disbelief and regret amongst friends of mine at the events now befalling the RAF.

[Greengrass]

I believe that he has no other choice Mr H and that was precisely the point of the post !

[GrahamO]

There are suggestions here that civilians don't know and don't care about the RAF cutsThe message in the press is that there are already too many trained pilots in the pipeline for the existing fleet and as the public know Harrier is gone and MRA4 is gone as well, they probably add two and two together and conclude the answer is four.

Do they care ? Not creating more trained pilots when we already have a surplus is not going to be a matter of outrage for the public who are already looking at their own jobs disappearing.

[kenparry]

Wholigan

Quote:
and be the best godammmn fighter pilot in the world


Now that I've retired there's a vacancy for that post!

Roj, how uncharactersistically modest of you!

[airsound]

The Torygraph publishes a letter from CAS today.
Sacking RAF trainees shows that the Government is wrongly directing our money - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/8326437/Sacking-RAF-trainees-shows-that-the-Government-is-wrongly-directing-our-money.html)

Interestingly, MoD has just published what it says CAS actually sent to the paper. The paper’s version fails to include a significant bit of trenchant criticism of the paper, including this
I was determined that this should be handled sensitively through the chain of command. However, despite knowing of our intent to provide accurate, timely briefings, your paper chose to publish an initial story which, being apparently based on hearsay, necessarily contained gross inaccuracies, making this task even harder for me and much more painful for those who will be affected. ......Speculation.......may fill your paper but it does nothing to inform those most affected.I do have to say that CAS’ original is over twice as long as the paper’s version (442 words, as opposed to 192). He can’t have been very well advised by his PR staff if they thought that an editor was likely to accept a letter as long as that. A short article might have been much better. But anyway, anyone who wants to get a particular message across in a letter needs to talk to the letters editor of the paper before sending anything in. It doesn’t sound as if anyone thought to do that.

Incidentally, the other bit the paper missed out was the fact that Dalton is Chief of the Air Staff, which I would have thought was somewhat germane to the whole thing.

airsound

[Pontius Navigator]

Should the title be changed to a quarter of the RAF aircrew to be sacked?

Or is that an exageration?

As for leaks in the press, Sir Stephen may be too young to remember when the Daily Express was the required breakfast read. In the days before rumour network, well at least electronic ones, lunch in the Club or a Whitehall pub was the main source of information.

[draken55]

"remember when the Daily Express was the required breakfast read"

If any current newspaper employed a journalist like Chapman Pincher they would now be having a field day:oh:

[tucumseh]

Dalton does not have a good track record when writing to the press.

His letters to the Guardian, Times and Telegraph on 6/7th January last year repeating the MoD party line on Mull of Kintyre were a pack of lies.

[newt]

Keep on dreaming Wholigan!!:yuk:

[Dengue_Dude]

Last in first out!!

Haltonapp.

Are you having a go at me Mr Y??? :p

[simonpo]

When the Americans pull out of Afghanistan, given their continuing financial deficits, aren't they likely to face big cuts in their military? Sorry for thread creep but surely the American military aren't going to remain immune from these dreadful cuts we are now seeing ?

There are suggestions here that civilians don't know and don't care about the RAF cuts but there is much disbelief and regret amongst friends of mine at the events now befalling the RAF.

Being a dual citizen, I like to keep up with how things are going in the states. They are already starting to make cuts. They have cancelled the last two OTS recruitment boards and numbers are down loads on what they used to recruit. I believe they are also looking at getting rid of quite a few junior officers in the not to distant future.

[sled dog]

Hmmm, i wonder what our "friends" in Moscow think about all of this ?

[WannabeCrewman]

Or our chums in the South Atlantic; at this rate, whatever HMG and ConDem save from Benefits reform may as well be spent on a ****-off great big red carpet extending from Buenos Aires to Stanley...:rolleyes:

[VinRouge]

Air Force Times Was reporting 10,000 officers the other week from the USAF going.

[cazatou]

sled dog

I think "our friends" in Moscow have their own problems to worry about in respect of reorganisation and consolidation following the demise of the Soviet Union and the Baltic States joining Nato.

Incidentally, I always found them very friendly on the occasions I was tasked to go there.

[Willard Whyte]

A 'friend' makes a better spy than an enemy, catz.

[cazatou]

WW

Very true - I was referring to the attitude of the Military.

PS I was also the Unit Security Officer.

[Pontius Navigator]

I had a coffee in the Mess at Conginsby once sitting next to a probable Spetnaz Major (judging by the T-shirt) from Kyrgyzstan. He was more interested in the motoring section of Exchange and Mart looking for Lada spares.

Nice chap.

[207592]

News of a career path denied by a change in circumstances is shattering, but it was the inevitable consequence of the “Autumn Review”. Red Line Entry’s contribution reflected the facts: the cost of hardware has escalated in real terms, so the Nation had either to opt to do less with fewer assets, or prioritise military hardware over, say, healthcare and social security. Decisions as those as hard as those faced, and those which have yet to be faced – of more, anon – may have been ameliorated if HMG had not got embroiled in Iraq and Afghanistan. WWII demonstrated that a country cannot fight a war and re-arm, and also have a decent standard of living. MoD have tried to fight and re-arm whilst the man on the Clapham omnibus was more interested in economic well-being. The assumption was that money grew on trees, which we all know to untrue, and it is an indictment on successive Defence Secretaries and military leaders, that they did not recognize and address the issues of funding.

Watch out over the coming months for a “Spring Review” which results in the rationalization and re-organization of Command structures, of cancellation of more hardware (long-range and rotary), and the closure of bases, and the realization dawns that the Army is only a home-based defence force, and the Navy a coastal defence flotilla. My crystal ball is cloudy but I think I can make out the word “The Best Flying Club in the World”, Squadron Leaders commanding Squadrons, Wing Commanders commanding the Defence and Training Wings, reporting to a Group Captain, and the CAS ranked as a Air Commodore. It’s clouding over, but I think I see military aircraft using only three airfields in a flat fertile area ….

[GrahamO]

@207592

News of a career path denied by a change in circumstances is shattering, but it was the inevitable consequence of the “Autumn Review”

That was when the penny dropped but the reasons starter much earlier..

We need a number of pilots of various types in the future, and we have a different number pilots at present.

There is an attrition rate in the current supply due to retirement, health, loss etc.

So if the training output of pilots, added to the number we already have is larger than the number we need after attrition is applied then we have an oversupply. Any half decent Project Manager understands resource scheduling and that would appear to be what has gone wrong.

Shouldn't the question not so much be about how many people will not get to meet their ambitions, but which group of people have allowed an oversupply to occur ? Sure, there will be occasional oversupplies when platforms are taken out of service, but surely its more about how have we managed to get a lot of people's aspirations set so high, when there would never have been a job for them at the end of training ?

[207592]

GrahamO,

Quite, and that is why I infer that senior heads will enentually roll. Senior Commanders need skills quite different from those necessary in their early career. In wartime they may need to be warriors, but in peacetime they need the skills of CEOs, with specialists supporting them. Perhaps to attain G/Cpt, an MBA should be mandatory?

One of the themes running through this thread is an acceptance of the status quo, even a clinging to the heretofore. Duncan Sandys predicted unmanned aircraft in 1957: his timing was wrong, but it seems his vision was correct. The CAS needs in part to be concentrating on what the RAF will look like in 10, 20, 30 years time and planning for that.

[500days2do]

GrahamO

I totally agree with your sentiments, although having complained this week about the costs incurred in project overrun et al, HMG then goes and does what all PM's hate....change the scope of the project at hand.How can a rushed cost saving exercise dressed up as a Defence Review ever give all involved a warm fuzzy feeling about the future. I would imagine the fuss being caused this week over a poor show in returning UK nationals home will be nothing compared to the angst and pain caused by an ill thought out, about turn on how we run the NHS. Off topic I know, but everyone is affected by that decision directly and the media will have a huge array of disgruntled people to run that story...

5d2d

[GrahamO]

Thanks - does the RAF or MOD have a function whose task it is to balance trained pilot levels with departmental needs ?

[Heathrow Harry]

207592 wrote:-
"Quite, and that is why I infer that senior heads will enentually roll. Senior Commanders need skills quite different from those necessary in their early career. In wartime they may need to be warriors, but in peacetime they need the skills of CEOs, with specialists supporting them."

it is interesting that, when a serious war breaks out, the majority of the Top Brass are in their late 50's & 60's due to the normal promotion ladder

Within a few months they are normally found totally wanting and are removed and replaced by commanders in their late 30's and 40's. This has happened over a couple of hundred years in armed forces all across the globe

We could do worse than to lay off every senior officer over 50 - I doubt we'd notice

[draken55]

207592

Sandys believed that missiles would replace aircraft end of story. The vision, if there was one, was that this would then allow HMG to cancel every aircraft type we had under development in 1957 bar the Lightning and Buccaneer, to concentrate instead on cheaper missiles.

ICBM's did supplement manned bombers in the USA and replace the V-Force in the UK for the nuclear deterrent role but in all other respects I consider that he got it as wrong as was possible. By the way, in 1957 he also seemed to ignore that no other country had reached the same conclusion as the UK. It was bye to the Fairey Delta and hello Mirage:sad:

Now UAV's are seen as the cheaper alternative to manned fast air which might be plausible in certain scenarios but less so in others. I certainly don't see an outright of end to manned fast jet aircraft in the short to medium term. Sandys missile only vision remains wrong.

As for the RAF being around in ten, twenty or thirty years, that depends on having a sponsoring Nation State. As things stand, might be as well planning to be the Northern element of the EU Air Defence Component:E

[Heathrow Harry]

you can buy a hell of a lot of drones for one F-22

I know its not very exciting sitting in a caravan playing Big Boys Flight Simulator when you could be zooming around at tax payers expense but I'm afraid that's the way it's going

[draken55]

HH

Horses for courses with a mix of manned aircraft and UAV's being the most viable route to follow in the near to medium term. Oh and don't let anyone find out where your caravan is parked;)

[Phil_R]

It strikes me that UAVs are only useful against a technologically unsophisticated enemy.

[Madbob]

I'd bet my last dime that the boys at Spadeadam would have a pretty easy time jamming most UAV's, even the sophisticated ones like Global Hawk.

Their "interference" would be enough both to upset the UAV's mission (stop the flow of data back to the ground rx) and possibly to disrupt receipt of its autopilot/command systems dealing with navigation/control either enough to cause it to crash, or to deviate off its intended course.

What's the survivability of a UAV compared to a manned (womanned) ac in say a Red Flag environment?

MB

[davejb]

Drones will work in a low threat environment, where 'work' is defined as doing a range of things that we certainly find useful. There are a number of things that manned aircraft do that nobody, as far as I am aware, has managed to outfit and program a drone to do. I suspect that there are jobs that need doing that drones will never be able to do.

This isn't be all that odd, no weapons system yet has been able to do everything - drones are no different. Whether a drone will survive in a high threat environment is more open to argument, I can think of several ways of disabling or destroying a UAV, ranging from the hard kill of employing somebody in a P-51 to go shoot them from the sky to the softer but also permanent kill of attacking the command link, or tossing a grenade into the control van. (Okay, it'll work the first time, after that I'll need a hilltop and a mortar).

I find it sad, more than anything, that people seem determined to see the evolution of combat as something that involves discrete steps rather than a continuum of change... I bet the countries that blend UAV use in with regular manned aircraft will do rather better than those who go UAV and sod the pilot.

Dave

[High_Expect]

And back on Topic!

[teeteringhead]

Thanks - does the RAF or MOD have a function whose task it is to balance trained pilot levels with departmental needs ? ... errr yes. The Air Secretary (for the light blue) - or whatever he's called now. Is it DCOS Manning or similar ........:confused:

[davejb]

Yes, sorry -
I was just following an argument!

So, ahem, I think something sensible ought to be done - figure out the cost of helping these guys enter civvy life as pilots, then decide to do the decent thing for at least those in the latter stages of training. Ifr absolutely necessary HMG could always call it a student loan, and seek to have it repaid as and when they became civvy airline pilots. Comitment works both ways, after all...

Dave

[draken55]

"the countries that blend UAV use in with regular manned aircraft will do rather better than those who go UAV and sod the pilot".

A mix of types is required that are fit for purpose rather than having bells and whistles for the sake of it. Post 2020 we might need the Typhoon to fly from land bases and Super Hornet from the carrier(s) both working with UAV's and the F-35C depending on the threat. Super Hornet can be bought wired for EW and to provide AAR both of which are force enhancing. Follow the RAAF's sound choice but then add the availability of the carrier(s) to solve the HNS issue.:D

Other than for training and for any real need, I see no point in having the
F-35C deployed all of the time carrier(s) are at sea. It's just to expensive:eek:

[207592]

Davegb's idea is capital! Ensure that redundant students with requisite hours and experience leave with at least a PPL and advance loans for the more advanced to qualify as commercial pilots. That should ease the pain.

[I'm Off!]

Errrr, am I missing something? Ideal though it sounds, where is the money coming from to advance anyone a loan for anything? Aren't we bankrupt? Isn't that what all of this is about?

Nice idea guys, but about as useful right now as suggesting we keep everyone and buy some more aircraft for them to fly...

[davejb]

If you really think the country is that broke, then there are an awful lot of other things that need to be cut too, with something like £660 bn spent in 2010 and £680 or so forecast for 2011 it'd be a drop in the ocean. The "Nimrod cost" for one year would cover it quite easily, with plenty left over for a new set of plasma TVs for the HQs.

It's a 'one off' cost, where we'd be helping high quality people make up for wasting the early years of their lives on something the MoD mismanaged. On the plus side, unlike most such handouts, the result would be a bunch of guys earning darn good wages and feeding a substantial amount back in taxes year after year.

Try not to think in such short terms,
Dave

[draken55]

I'm Off

A truly "bankrupt" country would not be able go on spending hundreds of millions on a NHS, supporting banks and helping out other countries.

Defence funding is, as always, down to political priorities. Last October the deficit and not Defence was the priority in this country. Bar Afghanistan, SDSR painted a pretty rosy picture of the world until 2020 to then justify cuts. Recent events in the Middle East have now shown that the Treasury/FCO/MOD assumptions are flawed and need to be reviewed or at least should by any responsible Government with interests in the areas now likely to be affected.

Can HMG really carry on as if nothing has changed?:hmm:

[I'm Off!]

Yes, hence the ringfencing of the DFID budget.

I'm not suggesting that the government will back out of ALL existing/future financial commitments. Merely that you are suggesting that what is effectively goodwill payments and loans to allow people to pay for licences, be made to allow our former employees to progress in another field. The UK government are not committed to this, they are not funded for this, and this will be viewed as extra spend that is not required due to existing redundancy legislation. If you therefore think that there is a cat in hell's chance that they will even consider this then I'm afraid I think you are being quite naive.

Nice idea, can't afford it.

[davejb]

I didn't say I expected it to happen, I am quite certain doing this would entail people thinking and doing things that they wouldn't normally do... which makes it pretty certain that it wouldn't happen in real life.

Now, ask me if I think it's actually doable, and that's a different matter.

[Aynayda Pizaqvick]

I'm going to play the devils advocate and ask why should we give generous remuneration packages to the trainees about to go out the door?

At no stage through training is anyone guaranteed a job on the front line and the 'pass mark' for training is effectively whatever standard the MoD requires to fill the available slots. Right now we need cock all pilots so the pass mark has just been raised by about 30%. Obviously this will be devastating for a lot of people who have dreamed of a career as aircrew, but they have received some of the highest quality flying training available and a reasonable salary while doing it - there are worse situations to be in!

Whilst I think it would be nice to give these guys a helping hand back into civilian life I also think people are dreaming to think that we are in a position to offer them anywhere near the generous packages being rumoured (e.g. a years salary while they study for their civvy licences and then a generous lump sum for redundancy). These people were still under training so why should they be offered better terms than someone who has served longer and completed productive operational tours elsewhere in the RAF? Quite simply they shouldn't.

The RAF would be quite within their rights to pay them till the end of the month and send them packing, but I really hope they don't resort to that.

[GrahamO]

@davejb

We must be born to disagree :=

It's a 'one off' cost,

Sorry, but few in government believes that after a decade of history on Nimrod. Many might suggest the priority is right that we can help millions of families with the money saved through not believing any more that anyone on Nimrod can estimate and can be trusted with money.

Gamblers logic again - "just one more bet will make it alright"

[davejb]

Good grief!
I was pointing out that the money allegedly saved from not running Nimrod for a year would more than cover the cost of what I suggested...it's nothing whatsoever to do with operating Nimrods, I was merely pointing to one source of money (as an example) to fund it that many on here would be familiar with.

Typical, you use the word 'Nimrod' in anything and it's automatically bad...

[MOVAGAIN]

Sorry but why should they receive any extra help other than that offered to the rest of the non aircrew personnel being made redundant? There have been many Branch / Trade reductions over the years and I don't recall the individuals being offered anything other than the redundancy package and the normal resettlement courses. Sorry to appear heartless but the pot is now empty and we should certainly not be wasting even more scarce resources which will give no benefit to our defence.

[BlindWingy]

You don't just wake up one morning and decide to become a pilot, for most it is an investment that starts in childhood, everything possible should be done to help these lads and lasses.

[Kitbag]

You don't just wake up one morning and decide to become a pilot, for most it is an investment that starts in childhood, No, that is a totally irrelevant argument- 'I had an ambition and government policy is stopping me achieve it', sadly I am sure there are may bright young things out in the workplace who have/are about to lose their jobs as a result of the financial crisis. As much as I respect aircrew this particular group have made no return of service, are not qualified to Wings, and still have a way to go before they are useful, ie CR. Aynayda Pizaqvick has it exactly right, it's a tough world.

[Neptunus Rex]

Next week, on 2 MAR 11, the Sri Lankan Air Force (SLAF) will celebrate its 60th anniversary.

An island nation, half the size of the British Isles, with no overseas commitments, it has an Air Force with 44,000 personnel - more than its mentor, the RAF.

How Rome has fallen!

[BEagle]

You don't just wake up one morning and decide to become a pilot...

Whether 't was the marsh warblers swooping into your mother's undercroft (Capt E Blackadder), or Vampires flying past the farm opposite on final approach to RAF Merryfield (me), the ambition to become a military fighter pilot (who would possibly settle for anything less?) was probably imbued at a very early age. It took about 30 years (in my case) between knowing that I wanted to be a fighter pilot until the magical words "24 Feb 83 Phantom FGR2 Op. Status" appeared in my log book - and that was in far more benign times.

So yes, Tory Boys Call-me-Dave and Foxy have dashed the hopes of some of our finest people, although Incapability Brown and that lying $hit Blair are wholly to blame for the nation's current deficit. The best that the government can now do is to provide these poor sods, whose loyalty, flying skills and personal qualities are utterly exemplary, with some form of compensation for the situation they now find themselves in.

They weren't 'chopped' through any failure on their part!

[Yozzer]

Beagle; you are confusing a time of honour with the twenty-first century.

A friend left work a few weeks ago to attend a doctors appointment. When he returned the workplace was locked. A few (former) workmates has taken to the local pub to debrief the unforseen demise of the company. No redundancy money whatsoever, and middle aged+ workforce have little hope of re-employment. A good time to raise the retirement age.

[MOVAGAIN]

BEagle

'The best that the government can now do is to provide these poor sods, whose loyalty, flying skills and personal qualities are utterly exemplary, with some form of compensation for the situation they now find themselves in.'
Sorry but exactly how do you know that these individuals have exemplary personal qualities - is this a new test at Cranwell I was not aware of? As aircrew I can understand and commend your wish to look after other memebers of your fraternity but you cannot expect the UK PLC or the MoD to single out one Branch for preferential treatment - exemplary personal qualities or otherwise. All individuals who find their career aspirations extinguished should be treated in the same (and hopefully) correct manner.

[Willard Whyte]

Whether 't was the marsh warblers swooping into your mother's undercroft (Capt E Blackadder), or Vampires flying past the farm opposite on final approach to RAF Merryfield (me), the ambition to become a military fighter pilot (who would possibly settle for anything less?) was probably imbued at a very early age.For me it was seeing the Herc crews at a Greenham Common air show sitting atop the wings of their grey & green party machines in deck chairs that made me want to join up. And yes, I got exactly what I wanted, despite the pathetic 'wit' of many (ex) fast jet instructors during basic training who deemed me to have an attitude problem because of my chosen path in government aviation.

[Aynayda Pizaqvick]

They weren't 'chopped' through any failure on their part!

Wrong Beagle, they were chopped because they weren't good enough for the standard that was required at the time. Whether that standard was lower last week or last decade is neither here nor there.

Don't get me wrong, as an operational front seater I feel for these guys and hope they get the best treatment possible but someone has to bring a dose of reality to some of the day dreaming that has been seen on this thread.

Stop thinking RAF Investor in People and start thinking MoD PLC.

[Exascot]

The best of luck to all those poor ladies and gentlemen who get the bad news very shortly. I know it is easy for me to say, but don't let the b....rs get you down. Use the guts and determination you have that has got you so far to get on with what could be a better prospect for the future.

I got exactly what I wanted, despite the pathetic 'wit' of many (ex) fast jet instructors during basic training who deemed me to have an attitude problem

I had the same problem. I got my dream in the end though - a really fast shiny white jet with four engines. We frequently had to slow down on military routes as we were catching up a so called 'fast jet'

[oldbaldeagle]

I think that we need to bear in mind that (almost) all of us who entered military aviation were aspirational, patriotic and enthusiastic. This isn't a question of Scrote and Sons, bobbin makers to the gentry, going down the tubes and leaving unemployed workers seeking new jobs. It is a question of highly motivated, able young people who have put enormous effort into their training and, most importantly, surrendered their future freedom of action and movement for a substantial chunk of their lives which they are prepared to risk on our behalf.

Those who have the prospect of a career in civil aviation should receive every assistance to convert their training to civil flying/engineering/ATCqualifications; we owe them that at the very least.

I will not hold my breath.

[LS-4]

Having been through a somewhat similar experience myself I wish to extend my sympathies to student pilots affected by this situation. I know that it can have a great impact on your lives and feel quite brutal and despairing to begin with, but I'm sure that you will eventually recover.

It might not match the experience which some aspects of military flying offer, but I think that civilian aviation can be worthwhile for those who are interested.

Best of luck to you while working towards better days.

[davejb]

Just out of interest,
my idea was the result of about 10s thought, by way of a 'get the thread back on track' as I'd followed a previous poster off topic. Later on I came to think, 'you know, it wouldn't cost all that much, and the money would be reclaimed in due course, and you'd only be looking at that fraction who were reasonably on in training.'..I'm not suggesting someone fresh from IOT should be given a bucket of dosh to complete commercial training.

As it'd be a loan it's also not actually going to cost very much to do, in the medium term - it seems to work okay with students, and I'm sure the soon to be ex-RAF officers will be at least as good a risk as the average graduate in underwater basket weaving at Bolton Poly.

I never was a pilot, so no axe to grind here, I just don't see why we're so intent on always doing the decent thing for complete strangers and never for our own folk.
Dave

[Dan Dare]

Could I encourage any of you ex RAF trainees to consider becoming ATCOs. As high calibre aviation enthusiasts you would be very welcome amoungst the troups (if you could first get past HR). I know it doesn't look as glamorous on our side of the radio, but its not a bad lifestyle and arguably more secure than most flight-deck jobs.

Good luck with whatever you end up doing.

[PunchyMonkey]

Condolences to all those trainee pilots who lost their jobs today. A sad day, especially for those who already had their wings.

[Heathrow Harry]

"This isn't a question of Scrote and Sons, bobbin makers to the gentry, going down the tubes and leaving unemployed workers seeking new jobs."

It is if you worked for Scrote & Sons

Forced unemployment is always grim - doesn't matter to whom it happens

Most of the ones on the RAF list will be young and well educated - they probably don't have families and mortgages

[davejb]

Most of the ones on the RAF list will be young and well educated - they probably don't have families and mortgages

Sorry (for the thread drift, if nothing else),
but the majority of RAF personnel being made redundant will not in fact be young RAF pilots.... I'd think a high proportion of those about to be sacrificed, thinking they were highly skilled specialists (that covers crew chiefs, Ops support, rear and front end crew) who were highly valued by the RAF, have significant financial commitments....and are now finding out that their "career", which appeared to be rock solid this time last year, actually has about 3 months to run.

There are people - and I'm not talking aircrew here, although my description probably describes a few - who have achieved a significant skill level, substantial rank, and who have all sorts to pay off, from car loans to mortgages to making sure the kidds finish Uni.... and they're going to get 3 months pay and the sort of kiss off that Michael Corleone gave Fredo.

This isn't about your local Halford's closing down, it's the Royal Air Force - and yes we should be treating the poor sods involved as a special case. Why? Because last time I looked the employees at Waitrose didn't sign a blank cheque that included being killed to further national policy.

Sorry, but I AM getting annoyed at people who insist on treating the armed forces personnel as if they're doing nothing more than that working at DVLA.

Dave

[Neptunus Rex]

Dave

My sentiments entirely, Sir.

[sled dog]

I wonder what a civilian recently made redundant feels about military redundancies ? Probably does not give a t*ss, whilst thinking " welcome to the real world ". My sincere condolences to all ranks / trades affected, but these are modern times, like it or not. Good luck to all .

[3 bladed beast]

Aynayda Pizaqvick......

'Stop thinking RAF Investor in People and start thinking MoD PLC.'

Completely agree with you. However there is a massive amount of hypocrisy from the RAF that spouts doctrine, that we must sacrifice and put the forces first, move around the country as directed and be LOYAL!

But, after spouting all this crap, we are just numbers. Which is fine, but please, no more bull**** from Air officers and APs such as ''RISE''

[Biggus]

davejb,

While I don't disagree with the general theme of your comment, I should point out that when you say..

"their "career", which appeared to be rock solid this time last year, actually has about 3 months to run..." you are in fact incorrect.

Nobody with an established career wil be leaving the RAF before Mar 2012 (volunteer) or Sep 2012 (compulsary). While it is less than ideal, volunteers will get 6 months to sort their life out upon notification, and those made compulsary redundant (will there be enough volunteers?) will get 12 months.

Maybe not brilliant, but not too shabby either.

Those chopped from flying training as a result of the SDSR willnot be as fortunate I suspect!

[cazatou]

sled dog

Your "Civilian" will almost certainly never have had to arrive home on a December evening and tell his pregnant wife that he is "off tomorrow" to the other side of the World to intervene in a dispute about "Land Rights" and he doesn't know when he will be back.

Most "Civilians" do not live in a world of imperatives or where the telephone rings at 2 AM and you have to go to work immediately and you have no idea when you will be home again.

HM Forces do not have "Trade Unions" - what has been present in the past is a sense of being valued.

The Military Covenant may not be quite dead - but it certainly needs some Resuscitation and TLC.

[Mr C Hinecap]

Biggus - are you unaware of all those on continuance who were given 6 months notice last year? They got rid of a lot of people on short time in a less-than-fair way.

[Red Line Entry]

Hang on, Mr C, ...in a less than fair way...".

They were on contracts, that were employing them after the time that they would normally have been discharged, which allowed them to say to the RAF, "I'm off" and be out in 3 months. Yet the other way round (in accordance with the same agreements that they had freely signed up to), they got 6 months notice.

I know it's a general feel sorry for ourselves moment, but how was that not 'fair'?

[Biggus]

Mr C H...

What RLE said...

6 months notice was what their "contract" said, and that is what they got, unexpected perhaps, but not "unfair" as it was part of the terms and conditions of the continuance in the first place...

You might also be surprised to learn all that I am "aware" of... ;)

[GrahamO]

catazou

While 110% in agreement that us civilians are not (intentionally) normally put in harms way, and in agreement that the Military Covenant needs to be revitalised before the ungrateful oiks in society forget about the valiant work of the Armed forces........

Your "Civilian" will almost certainly never have had to arrive home on a December evening and tell his pregnant wife that he is "off tomorrow" to the other side of the World to intervene in a dispute about "Land Rights" and he doesn't know when he will be back.

True in the literal sense but we too get posted to far flung locations to work for weeks on end with little choice if we want to keep our jobs. Its also a lot more common for the international sales person to have this done more often to them than the average member of the armed forces. Think 9 months of the year travelling - every year - not just when there is a flap on. Debatable certainly, but lets not pretend that the military are the only people to have this done to them.

Most "Civilians" do not live in a world of imperatives or where the telephone rings at 2 AM and you have to go to work immediately and you have no idea when you will be home again.

"Most" you are correct but then I suggest that 'most' military don't have this done to them either. As many of the boys on the MOD are about to find out, the reasons and the risk may be materially different, but I think you will find its a lot more common in the civilian sector than you might believe. I regularly get 4am calls from dozy customers who forget about time zones.

Its not as black and white as you may believe. The risk is undoubtedly different, but its not as if the Armed Forces are the only people who operate 24/7.

[sled dog]

GrahamO

Well said, i have had experience of these scenarios both as a Serviceman and Civilian, many times. Still feel sorry for the people losing their careers though.

[engineer(retard)]

I have also worked both sides of the fence and been sent halfway around the world on open ended jobs. I also get phone calls at odd hours due to time zone issues. However, the hotel I was staying in was not made of canvas and the local population were not lobbing mortars at me.

[622]

Not Burnley then...:}

[cazatou]

Graham O

"Think 9 months of the year travelling - every year"

That is what I did 11 months a year for the 14 years I was on 32 Sqn - I never did manage to get my Leave Quota in.

[Exascot]

444008

Yes but that wasn't 'real operational' flying :rolleyes:

[Rev Charlie DH Smith]

http://www.flickr.com/photos60537172@N05/5523761774/

[LFFC]

Jet2.com helping former RAF fliers to work on civilian aircraft (http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/business/business_news/8907469.Budget_airline_in_pledge_to_keep_RAF_pilots_in_the_s kies/?ref=rss)

I'm not sure if these are trainees though.

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/resources/images/1593728/?type=display


Expanding budget airline Jet2.com has pledged to help redundant RAF fliers find work in the commercial sector.
The Yeadon-based company is looking to increase its pilot numbers by 17 per cent this year to more than 350 by taking on 140 extra fliers as part of a major expansion programme.

[bandoe]

Really glad to see J. Bowland is still in the air. A thoroughly decent chap as I remember it from when he was my QFI. 5/5 for transition skills!

[PPRuNeUser0211]

Well said the above, hope he's got a good tannoy voice going!

[Bat Eared Armourer]

Quite right LFFC - visiting for a day
Bandoe and pba_target - JB is still in a blue suit (for now) flying a desk at a secret location near Bath. He is still in the air but only when I let him on weekends with the AEF! ;) Mrs JB

[JTIDS]

Am I right in thinking that those who have been removed from flying training, inc the EFT guys will be kept on the pay roll for 18 months?

[RookiePilot]

From what I've heard yeah, they get either 12 months or 18 months redundancy, doing various holdie stuff...

[vikingdriver]

Yes, if you are a non applicant then leave NLT Sep 2012, with tranche 1.
Special paid leave for all from FT if they can show that it's viable for a future career.

One rule for one?

Apparently this is cost saving?

Was an expensive room at Cranwell earlier.

[LFFC]

An interesting question was asked in the House today (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmdebate/03.htm#d2e1715):


Mr Murphy:
As for the sacking of RAF trainee pilots, the Secretary of State said—quite fairly, I thought—

“It would make common sense to ensure that those closest to the end of their course could be allowed to continue, if possible.”—[Official Report, 15 February 2011; Vol. 523, c. 820.]

How much common sense has prevailed? How many trainee pilots have been sacked within just 10 hours of earning their RAF wings?


Hopefully it will get answered:


Mr Robathan:
.
Finally, the right hon. Gentleman asked about redundancies of RAF pilots who had only had 10 hours of training to go. I am afraid I cannot comment on that, but I shall write to the right hon. Gentleman and let him know the answer.

[5 Forward 6 Back]

That question fails to recognise that getting your wings doesn't equate to anything particularly special with regard to combat readiness; there were plenty chopped who already had their wings!

If he means how many were chopped with just 10 hours until they were CR and deployable, then the answer's "none," as no-one on an OCU was let go.

[Red Line Entry]

This line of argument misses the point entirely. The training pipeline was shrunk because the number of cockpits they were feeding had reduced. It couldn't have been reduced before the (relatively) sudden announcement of the loss/reduction in Harrier, Nimrod and GR4 numbers, because if those cuts had not been taken, then we would have been short of pilots. Earlier reductions would have presumed the SofS's decision (a big no-no).

To graduate all of those in the pipeline would have resulted in 170 extra pilots kicking around with nothing to do, but all needing to be paid, costing around £6M per year. Alternatively, we would have had to sack 170 more senior aircrew who already have their wings. This would have been far more expensive, and could be viewed as unfair on people who had already given valuable service.

In other words, it has sweet FA to do with how many extra hours were required to get each trainee to wings standard!

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Earlier reductions would have presumed the SofS's decision (a big no-no).


From where I'm standing, what's gone on since SDSR is also a big no-no! Was it not obvious to everyone that defence cuts were on the horizon? And that therefore, among other things, the number of aircraft was going to drop significantly? There was no point waiting to find out exactly where the axe was going to fall - had we reduced the flow of people entering the training system earlier, fewer people would have been involved in the recent purge.

[Anonystude]

Red Line Entry -- would you rather get rid of 170 chaps, some of whom were ten hours away from OCU, and thus write off the nearly £350-400m of training; or hold them for a few years and drip feed them back into the system at a cost of a few £m?

Certainly, the IPS or GTS or whatever it's called this week has reduced; but that notwithstanding, the RAF is shedding chaps who've already passed wedges of flying training in favour of unknown future recruits to 'balance the pipeline'.

[Red Line Entry]

Torque/Anonystude,

Both of you raise good points. I was making the point that a reduction HAD to be made. Whether it should have been forecast far earlier (ie before SDSR) is a good question. I have argued elsewhere that the inability of our senior commanders to identify and address the £38Bn gap in Defence procurement was a major failing, so it's hardly surprising that this nettle wasn't grasped earlier (the famed 'Conspiracy of Optimism' perhaps?).

As to how the individuals involved could have been managed, I cannot comment from any knowledge or experience (not that that is a bar on pprune!) Personally, I would have been tempted to give them a free pass to re-enter the mob in 3 years and suggest they go globe trotting or get a degree in the meantime!

[AngryDave]

'no-one on an OCU was let go'

Incorrect.

And I think the question relating to those getting their wings relates to those in the ME pipeline who are relatively close to an OCU and CR in comparison to someone who gets their wings at Linton.

[Bob Viking]

Are you sure?
Are you saying people on OCUs have been let go?
Really?!
BV:hmm:

[Tommmo]

Coming from someone who's been in the redundancy briefs and gone through it all, there was not one mention of any planned cuts of people on OCUs. It's possible some on OCUs might have taken voluntary redundancy though.

[Anonystude]

There were definitely people holding for OCUs (within weeks of starting) who are being let go, however.

[Rector16]

Anonystude - you said:

'Red Line Entry -- would you rather get rid of 170 chaps, some of whom were ten hours away from OCU, and thus write off the nearly £350-400m of training; or hold them for a few years and drip feed them back into the system at a cost of a few £m?'

I know that it's hard times for those involved, but we tried this after the 1st Gulf War cut-backs. We kept people for 3-4 year holds in all sorts of random places, but then found that they ended up being too old for a full career, never had a chance to get promoted and were generally hacked off at being 'the lost generation'. I absolutely accept that these folks just joined to fly and many/some won't be interested in full careers - but the RAF gets people who can do full careers and fly if they let these 170 go and find 100 to replace them in a few years time. Holding for a few years cost 170 x annual wage as well - so it isn't free.

Even ignoring the 'full career' aspects, do you think the RAF wants 22 year olds on their 1st tours or 26 years olds?

Of course, there's nothing to stop those who have been 'let go' from re-applying in a few years time when the trg pipe opens. Especially if the politicians wake up in the meantime and realise that dangerous times call for more aircrew, not fewer!

[A2QFI]

When did a 22 year old last arrive on a squadron at age 22? I don't know the answer BTW - I am just asking!

[high spirits]

Rector,
Or perhaps our career structure is flawed. Too many assumptions that everyone joins to be CAS or CDS and hence crap staff tours that no-one wants. Perhaps we should consider more PAS to keep experience levels up and get rid of staff non-job postings that simply create more e-mail traffic for no more value.....

[frodo_monkey]

When did a 22 year old last arrive on a squadron at age 22? I don't know the answer BTW - I am just asking!

2005 definitely, it was me! Would have been 21 had I not had a couple of weeks leave...

[cazatou]

A2QFI

I arrived on my second Squadron at age 22 - but that was back in 1969. My first Tour in Sharjah was a 12 Month Tour- which was quite long enough!!

[maxred]

I met two of these guys recently, finishing off a PPL exam at a location in Yorkshire. Were on the last stage of Tucanos, called in and told the end was nigh. Out the door next day.

Not sure how I felt, gutted for the kids (so near yet so far scenario), however, a cup half full scenario on reflection. Yes, bitterly disappointing, however, knocked down, get up, dust yourself off, and go and progress a commercial career, wih a good deal of excellent training under your belt, at the taxpayers expense:\

If we forget the politicians short sighted/far sighted view on the forces, some kids can utilise it as a bitter positive.

[A2QFI]

So, 6 years ago and and 42 years ago! I got to a squadron at age 22 in 1961, having spent 3 years at Cranditz! The speed of training used to be such that someone doing National Service could get officer and flying training and 6 months on a squadron. If they were selected for this path they had to agree to extent their NS by a year which I guess made it 3 years instead of 2. Standing by for correction of this timescale. One of my colleagues had a 3 month hold for his main OCU and was given a Meteor conversion and a target towing posting to Singapore to fill his time!

[GrahamO]

Very sad, particularly when dissenting views to any subject or a comment get responses pulled for no good reason, and not for anything against the Pprune rules. Very disappointed indeed at whoever did it. Can I suggest the forums are intended for debate, not for following the party line slavishly.

[Wholigan]

GrahamO - it would be helpful if you could be a little more specific with your accusations.

I have just spent the time going through this whole thread. The sum total of deleted posts comes to:

a. About half a dozen that I deleted on 13 and 14 Feb as they were severe thread drift and absolutely nothing to do with the topic under discussion. For example, personal slanging matches about who gets flying pay and when, and whether or not they deserve it is rather outside the sphere of this subject. None of these were your posts.

b. There were 7 posts deleted by the posters themselves on 13, 14, 15, 26 and 28 Feb (one of them was yours).

c. There was one post deleted on 13 Mar because it had been posted twice by a newbie who obviously made a mistake.

So maybe you could make it a bit more clear where "slavishly following the party line" has detracted from this debate, because I actually have better things to do with my time than to spend it refuting odd charges from the punters.

Many thanks in advance .

[Wholigan]

Hmmmmmm - seems to have gone very quiet in here. Shame really,as I would have liked a reply so that I didn't feel that I had wasted all that time!

[c130jbloke]

Wholigan FC 2 - GrahamO (my god why did I bother) 0 :(






Sorry, could not resist it:p

[Rector16]

High Spirits - I'm with you all the way. I'm sat here behind a desk inside the M25 writing to PPRuNe when I should be flying!

PS - I was on my first Sqn at 21 in 1986. Ahh those were the days - 250' in RAFG, F104s to laugh at, LOA, tax-free beer. Pull up a sand-bag.......;)

[26er]

I was selected for national service pilot training having arrived at Padgate 30 Nov '49. We were kitted out for about a week, then to Hornchurch for aptitude tests etc, back to Padgate for a couple of days then those selected went to Driffield to hold until Christmas. 28 Dec report to No 1 ITS Wittering for groundschool, drill etc. At Easter the whole unit moved to Jurby, then 17 May 50 to 6 FTS Tern Hill until 31 May 51. When I started national service was for eighteen months so that should have been the end of my time but sometime around the start of 1951 it was increased to two years. So providing there were no holdups you were awarded your wings, commissioned or became a sgt pilot, then had time to go on leave, go to 202 AFS Valley on 2nd Jul via a week holding at Feltwell, and at the end of October to 229 OCU Chivenor. Not enough time for me to complete the course before finishing national service on 28 Nov 51. After five months of civvy street I rejoined, went reluctantly to CFS and was instructing on Meteors age twenty one and a bit but had it not been for that posting (and that's another story ) to become a QFI I would have been on a fighter squadron before my 21st birthday.

A prerequisit of acceptance for pilot training was an agreement to complete five years in either the RAux AF or RAFVR. I seem to remember that there were periods of leave at natural points during training such as completion of ITS, end of basic (Prentice) and on completion of Harvard phase.

[Q-RTF-X]

26er

What a nice interesting post which casts light on events in a not too distant bygone era - Thank you

[Lynxman]

My son was combat ready on his first squadron when he was 22.

[bangout]

Libya forces David Cameron to rethink defence cuts - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/8436505/Libya-forces-David-Cameron-to-rethink-defence-cuts.html)

[NutherA2]

"When I were a lad",

In the 50s, before gaps between training courses, holding postings & leave had been invented, things were a little quicker. Having joined the RAF in September 1954 I was declared "Operational" (Combat Ready?) in January 1957 at 20½ years old. Training included flying the Hunter F1 (no T7 yet) for the first time on my 20th birthday at Pembrey, nice present from my Flight Commander! :ok:

[Fake Sealion]

Nuther A2

In those days, with no T7 - how did you undertake conversion to the Hunter? (assume from from Meteor/Vampire?)

[Jig Peter]

From Meteors (inc. T7) and Vampires (inc. T11) to Hunters wasn't that difficult - some hours poring over Pilots' Notes and sitting in the cockpit "doing" the checks with a supervisor on the access ladder did the trick. How else ?
Did Lightning squadrons get 2-seaters before or after single-seaters?

[26er]

And we all knew you were on your first flight in the Hunter by the way your wings "twitched" after take off.

[Jig Peter]

And there was I thinking nobody was watching ...

But that experience came in handy when I had a go in the A320 simulator (not ecksherly flown one though) years later - PIO on finals - Berk !!!

[NutherA2]

In those days, with no T7 - how did you undertake conversion to the Hunter?
The OCU was a bit less formal than its modern counterparts, Since the Hunter F1 was fairly restricted in endurance what it could do (2100 lbs fuel, no gun firing) the first half of the OCU was flown on VampireT11 and FB5, just as our FTS had been. When it was time to fly the Hunter, our first flight included a supervised start, after which we were (literally) on our own. When all the checks including the take-off vital actions were complete before taxying, I can still remember the staff pilot patting me on the bonedome and shouting “Remember you’ve got 30 minutes of fuel to learn how to land the thing”


Prior to the flight we were supposed to have completed a written test on the aircraft systems and have this certificate pasted into our log book:-


No. 233(F) O.C.U. - R,A.F. PEMBREY
PILOT'S PRE-SOLO CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCE

1. Certified that I have received ground instruction on the
following subjects and that I fully understand the use of each
service on the Hunter F.1:-
(a) Avon engine Mk. 115
(b) Power Control system
(c) Hydraulic system (including wheel brakes)
(d) Electrical system (including R./T)
e) Fuel system
(f) Oxygen system
2. I certify that I have completed the Hunter questionnaire
in writing. I have also been checked out in the Hunter instr-
uctional cockpit and I am fully conversant with:-
(a) Vital actions
(b) Action in the event of emergencies
(c) Re-light procedure
(d) Procedure for abandoning aircraft
3. I possess an amended copy of Hunter F,1 Pilot's Notes and
I understand that I am not to fly without carrying them on me,
I also possess a copy of "Hints on Flying the Hunter F.1".

Date 10th July 1956 ...............................
Pilot's Signature

Certified that this pilots pre-solo Certificate of
Competence is correct and has been pasted into his flying log-
book, His questionnaire (serial no. 9) has been filed.


Date.10.7.56 .............................
O.C. "B" 'Flight

The 10th July, however, was the first day back at work after the mid-course long weekend. In mid afternoon my Flight Commander found me in the hangar, trying to learn where things were in the cockpit. He’d noticed it was my birthday and thought that my first Hunter trip would be a nice present.
In the rush, no-one noticed that this administration had been overlooked, so it was completed as a post flight procedure the following day, with a flexible attitude to the recorded date. He was right, though, it was one of the most memorable presents I ever had.

[airsound]

And we all knew you were on your first flight in the Hunter by the way your wings "twitched" after take off.
Same with the Spitfire - when the fng had to change hands to get the gear up - prolly the first time he'd had a retractable gear anyway.

airsound

[brakedwell]

My dreams of becoming a Hunter pilot were dashed by a short sighted politician by the name of Duncan Sandys! Our course (Vampire) passed out of Swinderby in July 1957. There were 18 of us, 11 regular and 7 national service - who were demobbed immediately after receiving their wings. I was the only student with a posting to Hunters. My course was not due to start until December, so I was detached to Valley (RN Vampire FTS) to beg borrow and steal as many hours as I could muster. On the 17th of October, which just happened to be my birthday, I was informed that all the RAF courses at Chivenor had been cancelled and I was to report to 242 OCU Dishforth to start a Hastings second pilot course the following week. I was a very pissed off pilot officer!

[26er]

29th June 1956 I had my one and only trip in a Seahawk. I was stationed at Tangmere. By this time we had all converted to the Hunter F5 but there were still some Meteors left. Being owed a favour by Lt Cdr Bloggs, having given him an IRT and passed him so he could go to the Air Warfare College (the Navy needed five hours actual in the last six months whereas the RAF accepted two hours actual and eight simulated) I took a Meteor for the short trip to Ford where I was met, taken to their coffee bar, handed a mug and the Pilot's Notes for the Seahawk. I had reached the first page where it said "the the Seahawk is a single seat naval fighter" when I was told that the aircraft was ready. On explaining that I 'd not read the PNs they said "you've flown Meteors, Vampires and Hunters so no sweat. Just make sure the wings are locked". Somebody had the decency to lean over my shoulder to make quite sure and off I went for an hour. When I landed I was offered a trip in a Wyvern which co-incided with the arrival of an ashen faced aviator saying that his had caught fire downwind. As they say in the News of the World, I made my excuses and left ! Shortly after that we Quickfired off to Cyprus for a week which became months, returning just before Christmas. That put paid to my hopes of further FAA aircraft flying.

Things were simple in those days. There were numerous chaps in 2TAF who, when squadrons exchanged for a week or so, were able to have a trip in the other's aircraft but no doubt they had a proper briefing. A ride in a RCAF Sabre for a ride in a Hunter.

[BEagle]

Tangmere is one of those magical RAF names - as is West Malling.

My first ULAS Summer Camp was at RAF Thorney Island in 1970; by then I'd finished my circuit consolidation, so spent most of the time aerobatting over the Isle de Blanche.

But those who hadn't finished circuit bashing were sent off to RAF Tangmere to do so. A few months later, Tangmere closed. I've kicked myself ever since for not having Tangmere in my logbook! But at least I had one landing at Malling!

It is simply appalling the way the RAF is being hacked to pieces these days. How lucky we were in the early 1970s; as UAS Acting Pilot Officers we were paid well and had a pretty good future ahead of us - lots of new aircraft coming into service and everyone was looking forward to flying the JP at Cranwell.

Now look at it. Makes you sick....:yuk:

[London Eye]

BEags,

I was at Thorney Island a couple of weeks ago on a day much like today (now where is that Weber thread?) and, not surprisingly, the people who serve there are a very happy bunch. The runway is still in reasonably good nick and used by visiting light aircraft occasionally.

LE