Post IOT

[Big Pants]

Sorry, another wannabe question.

Im another starting IOT shortly as an ATC officer. Just wondering what the chances are at looking at other branches whilst going through IOT.

Would it be possible to look at changing to e.g. Flight Ops if the post is availiable, or is it cast in stone that I will be an ATC officer. Not that this is a problem, it wasn't my first choice I admit, but would be interested to know what my other options are.

In all honesty I would like to fly rottary, and passed all apptitudes and the first medical, however I was told that you apply to ber a FJ pilot and you are then filtered down to multi or rottary if your not up to FJ. Is this true or is there the option of strongly pushing for rottary training?

Im sure ill get all the 'what u doing this for if ur not sure what u wanna do....' responses, but a bit of help would be greatly received as to be honest I am not too sure.

Never even considered flying untill they gave me the option of applying for it at OASC, and didnt have time to consider it properly.I'd be happy with ATC but feel that Im lucky to have the option to fly and should probably take it.

Any help greatfully received!

[Blue Stuff]

Hey Pants.

First of all, which branch did you initially apply for at OASC - you said that ATC wasn't your first choice.

Secondly, what is your basis for wanting to fly rotary, other than having been told you'd passed the aptitudes for pilot? Your streaming (for aircraft type) is largely based on your performance at EFT, and the "numbers" situation at the time. You will have the opportunity to complete a dream sheet, listing your order of preference to fly FJ, RW or ME, but it is probably the least important factor when the powers-that-be decide what you'll be flying. The truth is that there's lots of good flying to be had out there - regardless of what you fly. If you decide to apply for a branch change though, you'll need to convince people that you're not making the decision on a whim.

I had a mate on IOT who joined as a nav but wanted pilot crossover. He was advised to wait until the end of IOT before doing anything - you've got plenty to think about at IOT anyway. If you have a 'hold' post-IOT, try to get onto a Stn which operates helicopters, and get some first-hand experience. If there's time, you could always approach OASC before you start IOT.

Good luck.

Blue.

[Back in the Barrel]

The key to being selected for Rotary is being able to spell it. They probably thought you wanted to join some sub-specialisation within the catering branch.

------------------
Cento per Cento!

[Jimmifly]

Dont mean to sound negative, but three of my mates all applied for branch changes at IOT and were refused. I know each case is different, but as someone else said, there`s plenty time to think about branch changes post IOT.

All the best, and good luck with IOT

[Big Pants]

R-O-T-A-R-Y!

Happy now!

Originally after Flight Ops, but no luck. Do you think it would be best to keep my mouth shut and inquire towards the end of IOT about a change. Does it all depend on the positions availiable or is it based on your performance at IOT?

Many thanks!

[MilOps]

Big Pants, Whatever induced you to consider Flight Ops? Refer to my thread regarding whether I should apply for a branch commission as a flight ops officer. ATC is a fine branch with far more opportunities than Flt ops will ever be able to offer, with a reasonable chance of employment in the civil sector post RAF if thats your bag. How long before IOT and are you DE or graduate? Take it from someone who's done the remuster lark, once you're in, the service will want some return of service to amortise training, however I know of two pilots who are ex ATC, one is on the Kipper Fleet and the other was on jags a few years ago. If, and that's a big IF, after a couple of years you are lucky and are offered pilot crossover then you'll be entering a new career path behind the drag curve, you'll have seniority but no flying experience so promotion could be slow. Follow previous advice and approach OASC before IOT if time permits, also be aware that ATC are always short of people and recruit heavily to ensure numbers stay high.

Otherwise best of luck.

Kevlar on and taking cover

'You can teach monkeys to fly better than that'.

[MaxDrift]

BP,
It was certainly a case that you could request a branch change during week 16 of IOT, generally by writing a formal letter to the Director of IOT. If he thought you had a good case he would pass it on to OASC. In my time at IOT - 26 months as a Flt Cdr (Boo! Hiss!) - I only know of a couple of people who successfully got a branch change. Your best chance is to approach OASC before you start.

Best of British

Max

[Shouting Rad-Alt]

If you are not 100% sure then do not do it. As most people have eluded to, the chance of changing branches is remote. Do it before you start!!or accept what you have been given.

[opso]

Milops, everyone's personal circumstances are different; from what you have said of yours it would seem that attempting a Branch Commission in Flt Ops would not be your best bet, but that does not make Flt Ops a bad thing, just a bad thing for you.

Flt Ops already has a diverse range of posts that is likely to expand rather than contract with future reviews. Looking at your own expansive career, you should realise that most of those locations you listed now have posts established for, if not yet filled by, Flt Ops officers. There are of course many other posts as well that give the opportunity for someone joining up now to have a very varied, interesting and, at times, challenging career. You and I both know that many of thoses posts will also give plenty of opportunity for pure tedium, but as with any job, you take the rough with the smooth - let's face it, despite all the advertising to the contrary, even our pilots spend very little time airborne and much more doing paperwork. Commissioned ATC entry offers a less diverse range of established posts than Flt Ops - please remember that many of the 'good little numbers' that ATC officers move across to are actually OSB(Any) rather than OSB(ATC) posts. Big Pants' wish to enter Flt Ops off the street is understandable and if he wants to pursue it I would recommend that he makes his case strongly BEFORE attending IOT. But I would agree with you that ATC is also worthwhile career that he would be a fool to dismiss out of hand (not that he has suggested doing so) - as with every job the RAF offers, it pretty much boils down to the more you put in to it, the better and more enjoyable your time will be.

As I have asserted before, although Flt Ops has lots of potential and is basically a good idea, it suffers in the implementation and it is still too early to tell which way things will swing - certainly, to date, things have gone poor to badly for the specialization, but things can be reversed fairly quickly if the right 3 people set their minds to it and indications are that at least 2 of them are doing so although the effects will not be felt 'on the factory floor' for a good while. Flt Ops' problem is that it faces hostility from 3 sides:

-Many senior officers expect it to fail because 'it was never done that way in my day' and through their attitudes and actions try to turn that in to a self-fulfilling prophecy;

-Many TG9 (SNCOs in particular) are keen to point out errors and failings in the, as yet, unestablished specialization and its individuals rather than try to improve things or even just waiting to see how things pan out. By doing so, they tarnish it for the junior TG9s that will otherwise be aspire to and become the future's good Flt Ops JOs and add fuel to the continual complaints of any aircrew in the ops room at the time. All new things in the military take time to establish themselves, partly because they are fighting inertia all the time, but they become accepted over time and only then 'work correctly'. Female pilots and navs was just such a case - if you were to decide the fate of the scheme on the results of the first 3 years (as many aircrew wanted to), the idea of female aircrew would have been abandoned;

-The other OSB specializations are, understandably, taking opportunity of the period of turmoil that is inevitable with introduction of Flt Ops to feather their own nests and expand their standing. Just look at the number of new Regt Sqn Ldrs appointed in the past 2 years to see what I mean.

In short, Milops, I believe that you are being overly negative about Flt Ops and that as soon as Big Pants realises that the way to avoid obvious spelling mistakes is to do the 'military thing' of overusing abbreviations ('RW' rather than 'rottary') he should push to cross specializations before IOT if that's what he really wants to do.

[This message has been edited by opso (edited 24 May 2001).]

[X Blunty]

I knew of someone who started IOT as ATC and managed a branch change to pilot during IOT. She is now flying tornadoes.

It does happen, but not very often.

[A Fat-Gopher]

Big Pants-

There have been several recent cases of people who succeeded in changing post selection (including into Flt Ops, post IOT)

ATC tng is expensive and if you are not committed to it, then maybe it is not in the RAF's interest to push you into it. I know a couple who tried this arguament, failed, were sent for their Branch tng and withdrew from it to go Flt Ops. Eventually they got what they wanted and hopefully OASC have learned the lesson about pushing someone where they do not want to go. It is well worth calling them for an interview and trying (What's the worse that can happen - it's a no lose situation). If they say 'no' before IOT, try again after (if it is what you really want), if they say 'yes' you're laughing.

As to MilOps having a downer on Flt Ops, he is entitled to his opinion - but that doesn't make him right! It is easy to sit on the sidelines and criticize, but ultimately unrewarding. Undoubtedly the Branch is having a rough time at the moment, with some major teething problems. However, it is early days yet and none of the problems are insurmountable. A lot of the stations who said they would not touch Flt Ops with a bargepole at the beginning and prophecized the end of the world, are now very happy with the product. Times they are a changing. Ultimately, Flt Ops was a cost and aircrew saving measure and so development (or lack thereof) was driven hard by external factors. Folks are now starting to listen and there are a lot of good people, at all levels, working to improve things.

Ultimately, the RAF will have to make Flt Ops work, for financial reasons alone, and the DE's joining now could well be in for a very worthwhile career, with a lot more variety than ATC, for example. The list of Flt Ops jobs is ever increasing and although a lot of the current crop are less than inspiring, this is changing as the Branch gets established.

Whatever you do, good luck. Both ATC and Flt Ops offer good ops for the future and I for one am glad that I chose Flt Ops rather than Air Tragic! (I know others who feel the same)

Oh Gawd - edited for pire spoolong again. How did I ever get that 'C' ?

[This message has been edited by A Fat-Gopher (edited 25 May 2001).]

[MilOps]

OpsO and A Fat-Gopher.

You are of course right in what you say however if BP is harbouring reservations now he does need to sort this out sooner rather than later. As for me having a downer on Flt Ops, not so. You must remember not all TG9 pers want to be ATC, and until Flt Ops no commissioning opportunities existed for ops staff. I was among many who were delighted at the inception of Flt Ops and have spent many evenings partaking in chest prodding discussions with cynical aircrew in its defence. As discussed ad nauseum on the other thread Flt Ops needs to shake the tree and get its sh!t in one sock to sort out OJT, APET, credibility etc, etc.

For a young Abo joining fresh, I would be very excited at the prospect of Flt Ops. On paper it looks dynamic, diverse and challenging. Unfortunately this is not quite the case right now and career prospects could be a problem due to an undefined path at present.

Not all TG9 are cynical to Flt Ops, again remember a lot of us have been doing this for years and simply want credible leadership and are willing to guide JOs in the right direction. Be aware that the backbone of the military is the SNCO cadre, having learnt their skills through years of practical experience. Any officer unwilling to realise this is frankly going to be p!ss poor.

There is an awful lot of job creation going on in the Flt Ops world, often to the detriment of TG9 SNCOs careers. You said so yourself when you point out that Flt Ops Officers now have posts established in many locations, TG9 seniors have watched in horror as their jobs have been systematically robbed from under their noses. For example, there is no need for an OpsO on a sqn, but somehow they now exist on SH and shiny fleet ac, why? No small wonder that there is a slight rift at the moment. Our trade sponsor is now aware and should be addressing the problem to safeguard our prospects. It is a sign of poor leadership and management when a branch effectively removes work from an established trade to justify their own existence.

Anyway I digress, the upshot of all this is to encourage BP to enter the RAF, gaining acceptance from OASC is no mean feat, I know, been there got the T shirt, come back in 12 months etc. I would suggest that if time permits, arrange a stn visit, if practical, through your AFCO and see first hand what its all about.

BP if you live in East Anglia and are interested, let me know on this thread and a visit can be arranged, I've organised plenty in the past and all visitors have found the exposure very useful.

Kevlar on and awaiting incoming

"How many hours have you got on Spits Simon?"

[BEagle]

Flt Ops - more properly referred to as the 'Phone Answering Branch' has succeeeded in putting many under-qualified personnel into positions which had previously required aircrew experience. This is the result of the financial expediency of our bankrupt RAF - and is another example of just how bad things have become in the military. Whilst there was merit in stopping the absurdity of expensively trained aircrew holding down jobs such as OC GD Flt (or whatever the hell the blunties call it nowadays), other posts - such as Stn Nav - really need some expertise in the subject.

[A Fat-Gopher]

BEagle-
Fair point, well presented!
However, underqualified or not, Flt Ops are here to stay. As the aircrew shortfall increases, someone is going to have to fill the posts. Better to have a Branch dedicated to this type of role than just anybody. If properly trained, and given time for the experience within the Branch to ramp up, there is no reason why Flt Ops O's cannot perform at least as well, if not better, than the aircrew who preceded them (The same aircrew who were in Ops because they were not wanted elsewhere in many cases and so were disgruntled, demotivated and, quite often, poor performers. This did not just happen in Ops rooms either.)

However, these people need to be trained and properly educated. This is not happening.

[currybuoy]

currently looking at a branch change myself 5 years post IOT if you feel happy doing what you have been offered then go for it.It is very difficult ti change branches because the airforce is so short of people. several friends have been refused on the gounds that although they are suitable candidates it would increase the shortage in the branch they are leaving. be sure you are doing what you want if you get to IOT an want to change then register your desire with the relevant people.If you fail first time they is always post IOT and it doesn't hurt to have registered an interest already. do know 4 poeple who got a branch change during the last week of IOT but don't hold out any hopes.any way enough blah good luck and enjoy IOT it is good fun.