CFS(H) RAF Shawbury

[CoffmanStarter]

It would seem that CFS(H) up at Shawbury still think both the Bulldog and Dominie remain in service ... or at least CFS Exam Wing are still "Examining" on them ... and no mention of the Tutor.

Further down the same page ... mention is made of Jetstream QFI's :=

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/ScreenShot2013-07-26at171205_zps5b047a5c.jpg

I noticed this little glitch about two weeks ago on the main RAF Shawbury Station Web Site ... so thought I'd drop a polite eMail to the Officer I/C Shawbury Media & Comms ... using the name/address on this list ...

RAF Shawbury CFS(H) Web Page (http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafshawbury/aboutus/cfs.cfm)

I can only assume through the lack of a reply/correction that the central Media Points of Contact List is out of date it's self and/or the Shawbury eMail address given isn't monitored. I do appreciate this is low priority stuff ... but if you put information out like this ... there is a duty to keep it updated otherwise it looks unprofessional IMHO.

Hopefully PPRuNe Comms will do the trick ...

Best ...

Coff.

[muppetofthenorth]

While I agree it's low on the priorities, it does set a bad example.

TheStudentRoom is a very active webforum that has a sizable area dedicated to Armed Forces Careers and one of the recurring themes given to prospective wannabes is to largely ignore the RAF's own website when it comes to research for selection interviews. That hardly sets a good example for an organisation keen to get it's hands on the best and the brightest. Would KPMG, Deloitte et al allow such fundamental errors on their sites?

I remember the same RAF equipment glossy magazine being handed out for years with a picture of a KC-10 listed as a Tristar.

There are plenty of ex-Forces people around with time on their hands (or, in search of employment *cough cough*) who know this stuff. Is it beyond the wit of 'them on high' to use one or two?

[CoffmanStarter]

MOTN ... That's *Coff Coff* :ok:

[Motleycallsign]

It would also appear from that site info that NAAS is still alive and kicking at Cranditz, although I'm sure it became 55(R) Sqn some years ago and has since become 45(R) Sqn

[TheWizard]

CS, no offence old chap but haven't you been through all this several times already?

There was an 'official' response last time you pointed out an error.
The number of webpages is immense. They need updating. There are not enough people to do it.

The powers that be know it needs attention but regularly posting threads on here to highlight your powers of observation won't get anything done any quicker. :)

[CoffmanStarter]

TW ... and that's why I tried to eMail my feedback direct to Shawbury ... if the only thing kept up to date is the Media & Comms Contact List ... more "good spirited" people might be tempted to help out in correcting some of this stuff :ok:

It's the "reviewing" that takes time and resources ... but it takes nanoseconds to correct errors with the Content Management System available to the MOD.

It's also noticable if the Station Commander is "Tech Savvy" and sees their Web Page as a reflection of their Station ... Group Cptin I Gale and RAF Lossiemouth for example :ok:

[jayteeto]

Ooops, I was the squadron commander and I can't ever remember looking at the site. I will have to have a read.........

[MightyGem]

I will have to have a read...
A bit late now. :rolleyes:

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

The number of webpages is immense. They need updating. There are not enough people to do it.


Two of these statements are undoubtedly correct, but there are still loads of holding officers who could make some headway with this. The main RAF website is an utter disgrace (as noted previously!).