IS THE FUTURE REALLY PURPLE? [Archive]

Juansback Twosonfire

16th Mar 2001, 00:51

I don't think it would work for the simple reason that the majority of officers in the hierarchy simply find it difficult to accept senior-nco aircrew in positions of reponsability.

No matter what the capability or experience of the individual... the divide exists.

The current situation of officer only exchange postings to anything remotely interesting will continue whilst the 'pond life' of experience will be left to continue bringing on YO aviators in the time honoured tradition.

'Up the Corps' - Hussar!!!!

------------------
Better 5 minutes late in this world, than 5 minutes early in the next - Pax Vobiscum

[This message has been edited by Juansback Twosonfire (edited 15 March 2001).]

SWB's Mate

16th Mar 2001, 00:58

One reason the Services have trouble operating jointly is that they don't speak the same language. Foe example, if you told Navy personnel to "secure a building" they would turn off the lights and lock the doors. The Army would occupy the building so no one could enter. Marines would assault the building, capture it and defend it with suppressive fire and close combat. The Air Force, on the other hand, would take out a three-year lease with an option to buy!

The Bonk

16th Mar 2001, 01:09

OK, valid point, but look how the RN got round it with 847 (Ex 3 Commando Brigade Air Sqn)....commission all the good guys. Now you have ex rankers frontline Junglie, RN Lynx and down at Culdrose doing SAR. We did the same with the Maj/Capt shortage by quickly promoting a shed load of SSgts and WOs who funny old thing are now doing junior staff jobs and in the case of 7 Sqn, an exchange.

The SNCO / different Service language is just education...in 2 years time no one will ever look at GOPWO and prevent him from going on an exchange etc. As we all know the postings branch certainly does not have that kind of gameplan....it only just copes with the current one.

JHC....you started this thread....have you got any inside info or are you going to BEagle it all to yourself?

[This message has been edited by The Bonk (edited 15 March 2001).]

ChristopherRobin

16th Mar 2001, 23:11

I think it's a great idea, but it's far too radical to be even considered - just one thing though - could we please NOT wear the horrible RAF polyester trousers? ("look honey - real rayon!")

------------------
Christopher Robin

Reluctant Staff Officer

17th Mar 2001, 00:10

It strikes me that all the FAA and AAC pilots on this topic are gagging to fly with the RAF. Better toys or more fun, what do you think?

RSO

St Johns Wort

17th Mar 2001, 01:43

Last info I had was that over 100 AAC/FAA pilots had registered with the RAF rotary pilot poster looking to get a pair of poly wotsit trousers.

------------------
sub rosa

[This message has been edited by St Johns Wort (edited 16 March 2001).]

Vortex_Generator

17th Mar 2001, 02:27

Talk to a Canadian. They tried it a few years ago (one uniform, rank structure etc) and are now going back the other way.

The Bonk

17th Mar 2001, 11:10

Oh is that so reluctant Staff Officer....you are right for the moment, in that you do have all the Gucci kit and I do bow to the Shytehooks superior lift capacity and Zeus on the GR7...but just remember SDR changed alot....hmmh where do I start...AIM 120 that whipps the F3 (NITEX had you boys openly admitting)....AH...now the Shytehook can carry all our stuff around the battlefield.....leave the Puma at home coz it goes very fast for sod all time....

But all of this is pure semantics, and us coal face diggers can do nothing about top level budget holders....but as to the people...come on oh reluctant one, even you you lot know that you look like the RAC, over man every Det because you can't cope with the banter and need moral support, you certainly pass out after one Babycham, can't pull to save your lives, our restricted by some many rules that doing an Op is like your first solo (Crew Duty time/Planning Off the Hoof/ Flexibility / More Briefings than the Whitehouse / Signing for Royal Flights....the list is endless)

What I am saying my old mucker is that whatever the kit you have, once you have gone upity up up for so long it is the bloke you have to share a cockpit/crewroom/bar with that makes the job. :)

A good night and still up to flying speed...it could be worse...I could be drinking and dialing the girl friend, so thanks for taking the complete drivel Reluctantant Staff Officer....off to bed to Staff myself up my own channel...night!

Edmund Blackadder

17th Mar 2001, 20:52

Gents,

This is the fundemental argumement that if the right outcome is obtained, should drive the armed forces into the 21st centuary.

Juansback,

It is just this type of elitest s**t that holds back the Army and prevents them from achieving any kind of success in the field of aviation. This is exactly why Apache will not be employed to its capabilities and the AAC is restricted to being the senior officers taxi service!!

It is my experience that if you employ the most able people for the job irrespective of rank and social background (I can't belive that social background is even an issue in the 21st centuary) you will have a very capable weapons platform. However if you continue to harp on about what your grandfather did for the regiment the AAC will surely die a slow and painful death.

A more combined future must be the way ahead whether it be in the same uniform or not. It is not a question of economics or "man-management" but just bloody common sense. Harriers are RAF and Navy but are used in support of the Army as are the SH fleet. Much of the Albert tasking revolves around the Army and Nimrods revolve around the Navy. It just makes sense that at a senior level as well as a squadron level all the servicres are represented.

We must get our heads from up our ar**s and try and move forward. Traditions should not be forgotten but must not be allowed to get in the way.

We need a cunning plan.

Ed

jungliewafu

17th Mar 2001, 21:33

I think you are possibly missing the point about the Navy and Army wanting to fly the Crabs shiny toys! Each service has its own unique identity and the thing that scares the Navy most is that the Crabs will try and impose their "as long as were comfortable were not going to worry about the job too much" rules upon the other services. You may have the most capable cab (Chinook) but its ultimately how your pilots fly it that earns the respect of the customer ... ask many an Army grunt about this issue and they will take the Navy or the Army over the Crabs any day of the week. Personally I hope we stay in our own uniforms .. we can still cooperate but that uniform and the ethos along with it means alot.

smooth approach

17th Mar 2001, 22:01

"United we stand, divided we fall"

Some of the comments I am reading completely dishearten me. Every Service has it's place and within each Service each person has a job. Now if we continue to bicker with eaxch other using the "my chopper's better than your's" argument, we have totally missed the point and are in danger of complete self-destruction. Edmund is totally correct. If we don't break down many of the parochial barriers between Services and, dare I say it, cap badges, we will continue to be the laughing stock. Apache is the classic example. It is an AWESOME machine, however, unless it is used in conjuction with (note I have not said 'supported by') other assets, be it air, land or maritime, we may as well leave the aircraft in it's nice shiny box.

Wake-up out there. Jointery is the ONLY way ahead. Yes, we should maintain the ethos of our own Services but, please, let's stop being so derogatory about the other Services and start thinking how we can work with each other.

Smoothie............

PS Jungliewafu, you're talking complete B******s. I ferried thousands of 'grunts' around who are only too pleased to have been moved by the RAF.

JHC

18th Mar 2001, 16:41

All valid points....so how do we go about it (Hypothetically speaking of course....sorry Bonk, no inside news, just one of those what ifs/gut feelings that is looking more and more likely given the budgetry/political pressure to cut cut cut save cut chop save cut etc etc.

If JHC/JFH was step one......Odiham moving to Yeovilton.....Joint JSP 318 (step 2)....in reality all we are talking about is history books/Service tradition and the colour of the cloth we wear...surely step 3 is only just around the corner....gulp!

[This message has been edited by JHC (edited 18 March 2001).]

Hybrid

18th Mar 2001, 17:34

JHC is quite correct, the UK Defence Force is coming - by stealth rather than the overnight failure of the Canadian fiasco. The JHC, Harrier Force and an Admiral as AOC 3 Gp are all paving the way for the future almalgamation of all 3 services into 1. Then, all jobs are up for grabs - first tour Chinooks, second pinging! There will be a lot of grief for those of us that cherish individual service identities, but youngsters joining will accept it as the norm - I fear it is inevitable.

Edmund Blackadder

18th Mar 2001, 19:59

Hybrid,

Why fear the inevitable? I don't think we will get to a stage where we all wear the same uniform however I can see the "1st tour Chinook 2nd Dippers" happening, and why not? All tours have their pros and cons, but could be for 3 years only allowing people to retain interest but those who wish to stay may be abvle to. The cross pollination of ideas can only be of benefit to everybody. Each service would gain by understanding the problems of the other and should therefore become more effective.

A starting place has to be with a joint IOT (sorry to those who have heard me bang on about this before). A core training that removes all this class and social background b******s before splitting to a specialist training establishment. Jointery must be bred from an early stage to prevent some of the short sighted c**p from becoming an issue. After that who knows? AEOps in the front of Apache, Navy Sonar operators in Nimrod, Army pilots in Alberts. Go on , you know it makes sense!

We need a cunning plan!

Ed

smooth approach

18th Mar 2001, 20:02

Ed, I fear you may be too 'radical' (far sighted) for some of the luddites out there.

JHC

18th Mar 2001, 20:14

Slackbladder....

1. JOINT IOT would certainly go against ARMY maxim of soldier first, and Navy one of Seaman (little chuckle to myself)...it is only Cranwell that accepts that it cannot begin to train Engineering/ATC/Admin/Aircrew stuff at Cranwell, sticking to the conceptual leadership / mechanics of the RAF.

2. As to Chinook/Pinging....surely to be truly effective in a role takes experience...just take the example of putting the GR7 and Chinook on the back of ships...that kind of experience takes a number of years or you lose your back wheels in the Med?

I am only playing Devils advocate on this...hence my handle, I think we all have something to bring to the party.....but I am not too sure how with out losing those good old terms Operational Capibility/Effectiveness......especially as everyone quotes the Canadians, but doesn't actually pin the exact reasons why it failed FOR THEM?

The Bonk

19th Mar 2001, 00:34

Hi everyone I'm back.....just got rid of Fridays hangover....hmmmh nice....(what does it say in 318, no more than 50 units of alcohol within 12 metres of the aircraft or something like that .....but lets be totally honest, if the balloon went up tommorow then I would like to think that we would all be working for the common goal anyway. Certainly in the BH force we would all be wearing our DPM...so even the uniform question goes apart from the bar codes/pips on the shoulder.

I would also like to think that all the Service rules would be given a stiff ignoring to get the job done.....if you think I am going to do an NVG recce into enemy territory you can swivel....Sir...and I would like to think the Crabs wouldn't turn round and say to the ground forces on operations that their H Hour would not be achievable because they had to do a crew change to prevent them from going out of crew duty time.

I was really impressed with how well everyone integrated on NITEX. Yes we all made mistakes and learnt alot, but that is the place to do it. All 3 Services put the shoulder to the wheel, bantered up large, but were very effective at ALL pulling together for a common purpose.

Then again, if this is the way it really will be, then why aren't we training for it now.....what do the Hooligans say...train hard fight easy or something along those cheesy lines!

Back off into the Betty Ford clinic...bye :)

L4Cuddles

19th Mar 2001, 00:37

Edmund,
Having seen a number of ex-FAA and AAC join the SH faternity, JHC is correct - role changes take time to adjust to and additional trg is frequently required, especially in specialist roles. Thats not to say they don't bring different experiences and alternative views. Maybe and exchange guy would like to comment.

Juansback Twosonfire

19th Mar 2001, 03:53

Edmund Ol fruit!

I think the term 'read, digest, in your case read again, think about the content of what was written, think a little bit more - 'ca ching', the the penny drops.

If you'd bother to put brain in gear before engaging fingers you'd have seen that I was saying that the present system is hoop and needs to change.

By the way - what my grandfather gets up to is his business!!

------------------
Better 5 minutes late in this world, than 5 minutes early in the next - Pax Vobiscum

A and C

19th Mar 2001, 13:05

As far as i can see the time has come to phase out the RAF as its reason for the formation of the RAF as defined in the 1917 smuts was "an independent means of war operations" the idea was to take the war far behind enemy lines.

As the RAF is no longer able to do this because of no replacement for the vulcan the reason for its existance has disapeard.

Historicly the navy defend the shores of the UK so they should take the air defence ,ASW and SAR.

Most of the rest of the RAF task is just sub contracting for the army so CAS and tactical transport should be left to the army.
All other transport and basic flying trainning could be a joint effort.

The two main advantages of this are first the chain of command would be shorter as less "top brass" would be required.
The second advantage is that as an outsider i have never seen a flying operation that makes it all most impossable to fly due to over regulation as the RAF ,this culture that flying gets in the way of career advacment due to the risks involved so try to stop as much of it as you can must be stamped out and i see the only way to do so is to remove most of the "top brass" and get back to using the aircraft as a means to an end not an end in them selfs.

smooth approach

19th Mar 2001, 16:47

A and C

A well informed and illiterate argument.

:)

Thud_and_Blunder

19th Mar 2001, 18:14

Which was the well informed bit?

smooth approach

19th Mar 2001, 21:55

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.......... now let me see?

:) :) :) :) :)

oldbeefer

19th Mar 2001, 22:23

Well at least the RN have finally agreed to number formation positions the same as the rest of us (last week). Perhaps there is hope?

junglejim

20th Mar 2001, 01:36

Oh my God!!

Next they'll lobotomise us all and remove our sense of humour and just for good measure make us comply to crew duty time.

May as well go all the way and make us wear uniforms made by Levi's as well.

Or is that what JHC meant by jointery?!!!

Banter zone open...............

Edmund Blackadder

20th Mar 2001, 02:28

A and C,

Although I think what you said was in jest you may not be far wrong, after all that is surelty the ultimate form of jointery!! I personally have no problem with any suggestion that moves the debate forward.

Juansback,

I must just be stupid as the penny still hasn't dropped on your original post. Never mind.

Wibble

Ed

JHC

20th Mar 2001, 12:13

I was hoping for more constructive ways forward with the inevitable (you know, just so that when it happens it doesn't smack us in the face/or bite our back sides....dare I say actually having the coal face put an input/mold this future UK Defence Force)...but after 27 odd posts of of somr good debate, no flying,and a few days until happy hour....then if you want to begin the banter zone....red light....green light ...go!

MUDGUTS

20th Mar 2001, 12:50

Considering how adaptable most of the armed forces seem to be I see no real reason why "jointery" could not work.

Many times on this forum I see those who are proud to do their job and view adversity as merely another obstacle to overcome no matter what form it comes in.

In fact the harder the job the more satisfying it is to overcome any problems contained within it.

Many multi-national corporations have successfully joined forces with others in order to become stronger and more efficient.

There is only one barrier to "jointery" that is going to be extremely difficult to overcome:

It is the bigotry of those who, without justification see themselves as the elite and are not prepared to serve alongside those who, in their eyes are not.

These people are present in all ranks and I'm sure, all services.

This was evident during the second world war as those who saw the T.V. programme "The Few" will have noticed. In this case it was RAF officer pilots who were the CAUSE of the ill-feeling at the time and without doubt downgraded the operation as a whole.

It has always seemed unusual to me that despite many countries becoming allies to fight against the NAZI'S during the second world war and the formation of NATO and many other colaborations since, we have inside, and commanding our armed forces some of the most predjudiced and bigoted people around.

Those who seemed to have forgotten what it's all about.

It is these people who are the biggest and most dangerous obstacle to the achievement of a truly strong defence force.

[This message has been edited by MUDGUTS (edited 20 March 2001).]

A and C

20th Mar 2001, 13:05

Ed blackader my last post was perhaps a little in jest but as a tax payer i want to see a strong defence force for the UK and am happy to pay for it.
I have no problem with guys taking a few days off in spain or a nimrod going to france befor christmass as long as these things are tacked on the back of training ,all jobs have some perks and why should the armed forces be diferent ?.

What i object to is when a burocratic system gets in the way of the job and that seems to be the case with the RAF at the moment ,a number of guys i know say that when they need pulling out of a ditch in a field in NI the last people they call is the RAF because it takes to long to get a responce ,if this just one guy telling me this i would take it with a pinch of salt but it is not and it is a view held across the ranks.

I shall soon get another chance to see if my views on the RAF culture hold water as im about to get an inside view of how an aircraft i know well is used by the RAF.

As far as i can see as a tax payer the culture in the upper ranks of the air force is getting in the way of the job that the air force is charged with doing and no longer provides VFM and so the sorce of this culture should be removed.

[This message has been edited by A and C (edited 20 March 2001).]

RubiC Cube

20th Mar 2001, 17:23

Want to see jointery in action? Pass through the new joint staff college at coffee break. In the light blue corner - RAF junior courses. In the white corner - RN junior course. In the brown corner - the army junior course. In the other corner - the advanced course (joint). Oh, by the way, most of the staff have their tea in a separate room.

Edmund Blackadder

20th Mar 2001, 22:30

Mudguts,

You are entirely right and at the same time entirely wrong!! It is the bigots and the ostriches that seriously impede the efficiency and effectiveness of joint ops. However it is the calibre of person, whatever the rank or position, that is attracted to the forces way of life that aalows us to at least have ideas such as those in this forum. Whether any of these ideas become reality is another debate entirely. So the people are both the strength and weakness of the armed forces. Put the right people in the right job and the results can be remarkable. Conversely....

A and C,

Its good to hear from a non-service source. What is the aircraft you are talking about? Jointery is not only about talking to each service but realising that as we move to glass cockpits etc the civillian industry could teach us a lesson or too also. I couldn't agree more. The bigest frustration I have had to date is having to deal with all the bulls**t and red tape. I do feel however that some of your NI anecdotes may be service coloured opinions but I get the gist. Some of the comments made such as "RAF crew duty time blah" miss the point of jointery. Just because a single service has done things a certain way forever doesn't make that way right. Just because a frigate driver tells his helo pilots to get airborne without any reference to sleep patterns etc doesn't make it safe or sensible. Just because the RAF have always done the SH role forever doesn't mean that the Army wouldn't do it better. Jointery is about taking the best that each service has to offer and using it efficiently, not in terms of cash but in tetrms of operational capability. It's not just a qustion of talking to the other services but of listening and understanding what they have to say. On the point of Staff College the system that allows this sort of polarisation must be fundementally flawed.

Any way I've gone on enough.

Wibble

Ed

JHC

20th Mar 2001, 23:12

What happened?....went to work thinking of returning to the Junglies banter zone (knowing it wouldn't last long...alcohol abuse has destroyed so many of their brain cells that now they have Alzeihmers and smell of wee!)...but instead I find more logical posts.

The point about the 'Joint' staff college boils down to mates/friendship/familiar faces etc (Gregarious human trait the trick cyclists tell me...baah ).....a good joint piss up will soon solve that. eg Block 18 or the name badges in the bar at Aldergrove or the Shawbury happy hours...just to mention a few. At the risk of joining The Bonk in the alcohol abuse clinic.....most of the teething problems soon get sorted out in the bar, where a rationale can be put behind a flying action. If it was questioned over the air/net it would turn into Radio Army Air Corps.

OK ...I have had a pop at 2 of the Services......but far too easy, too obvious Crabs and will end up with pipe dreams for Apache or the increased distance from Yeovilton to Odiham hitting raw nerves.....but then again just think of that happy hour.....OCEAN back alongside....Chinook grounded due to another tech problem....now have the powers that be thought about that alcoholic scenario in the mess.....at least it would be a Joint mess...on the carpets...curtains...windows...everywhere!!

P.S. Do all the Staff Officers at JHC have happy hours !?! :)

SH Monkey

21st Mar 2001, 01:41

To get back to the original argument, ‘ Would you leave…’ Well yes, and reading some of the replies just reinforces that.

A number of the replies on this thread demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the other Services. That is not strictly a bad thing as long as you except that you need all 3 Services to complete the overall defence picture. God forbid we let any one of the Services have their sole way.

(Moreover, without the Army, the RAF would only have the RN to laugh at.)

[This message has been edited by SH Monkey (edited 20 March 2001).]

SWB's Mate

21st Mar 2001, 02:43

A couple of things. In my limited 30 year experience, i've noticed that whenever the army get into anything as a joint venture, they just throw their teddies out of their cots until they're allowed to take over and run the show.
Secondly, don't the army have SNCO or even JNCO pilots in their helicopters? Surely not. Non-officer pilots. Good God, we stopped all that sort of thing after WW2. Can't have that, don't you know.

only1leftmate!

21st Mar 2001, 03:08

SWBs mate

it may please you to know that when the Defence Fuels Group was formed, the RAF did a clean sweep of the whole lot and are now rapidly invading the Army's hallowed Petroleum Centre.

Why the Air Force Success? we had to go to the highest common denominator as a flight safety issue.

Is it a bad thing? Apart from the Col having lost supremity in his own Mess (he gets told when the dining-in nights will be by an RAF 1*) no. All the JOs love the mix and get access to a much braoder professional forum as well as places on each other's courses.

Who knows, perhaps the RAF may even allow the Army to hot refuel its helos one day- not!!!!