Air Cadets grounded?

[POBJOY]

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1067x800/linton1_1514d0ccad5fcbf2cd979efd96a5b6d3727b87a5.jpg
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1067x800/linton2_8e155e432fff010eb6cfceb9236ca3acc16d28e4.jpg

I found these at Linton On Ouse last week and they were very close to a skip although possibly not beyond saving ?

Well done David I see that they are also getting rid of the 'brush' that has served so well in this fiasco. The carpet of course is still in use !!!!

[Olly O'Leg]

David, check PMs please. We’ll look after the signs!

[Arclite01]

Interestingly virtually all the VGS Motorglider sites are still under MoD control. Having been told they were closing and being sold off..............

From Wikipedia

611 VGS (RAF Honington (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Honington)), formerly 102 GS Site still MoD
612 VGS (Dalton Barracks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Abingdon)), formerly 104 GS – disbanded 14 August 2016 Site still MoD
613 VGS (RAF Halton (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Halton)), formerly C122 GS – closure announced on 10 March 2016 Site still MoD
616 VGS (RAF Henlow (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Henlow)), formerly 106 GS – closure announced on 10 March 2016 Site still MoD
618 VGS (RAF Odiham (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Odiham)), formerly 146 GS and 168 GS – closure announced on 10 March 2016 Site still MoD
624 VGS (RMB Chivenor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMB_Chivenor)), formerly 84 GS – closure announced on 10 March 2016 Site still MoD
637 VGS (Little Rissington) – closure announced on 10 March 2016 Site still MoD
633 VGS (RAF Cosford (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Cosford)) – closure announced on 10 March 2016 Site still MoD
634 VGS (MOD St. Athan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_St_Athan)), formerly 68 GS – closure announced on 10 March 2016 Site still MoD
635 VGS (RAF Topcliffe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Topcliffe)) (formerly at BAE Samlesbury (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Samlesbury)) – closure announced on 10 March 2016
636 VGS (Swansea Airport (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swansea_Airport)) – closure announced on 10 March 2016 civilian but still there........
642 VGS (RAF Linton-on-Ouse (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Linton-on-Ouse)), formerly 23 GS – closure announced on 10 March 2016 Site still MoD
663 VGS (RAF Kinloss (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Kinloss)) – closure announced on 10 March 2016 Site still MoD
664 VGS (Newtownards (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newtownards)) – closure announced on 10 March 2016 civilian but still there........
631 VGS (RAF (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Kinloss)Woodvale) – closure announced on 10 March 2016 Site still MoD

So absolutely no reason for them to ever have been shut down had the equipment been refurbished...............

The others

614 VGS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._614_Volunteer_Gliding_Squadron_RAF) (MDPGA Wethersfield (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDPGA_Wethersfield)), formerly 142 GS, 146 GS and 147 GS Site still MoD
615 VGS (RAF Kenley (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Kenley)), formerly 141 GS and 168 GS Site still MoD
621 VGS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._621_Volunteer_Gliding_Squadron) (RAF Little Rissington (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Little_Rissington)), fSite still MoD
622 VGS (Trenchard Lines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Upavon)), formerly 89 GS Site still MoD
626 VGS (Predannack (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predannack)), formerly 82 GS Site still MoD
632 VGS (RAF Ternhill (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Ternhill)), formerly 45 GS Site still MoD
644 VGS (RAF Syerston (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Syerston)), formerly 29 EGS Site still MoD
661 VGS (RAF Kirknewton (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Kirknewton)), formerly 1 EGS Site still MoD

Only my favourite site at Hullavington didn't survive:{

The more I turn it over in my head the more I think this was a calculated plan to decrease the number of VGS's and there was never any intention of returning any of the Vigilants to service. Reduced VGS = enough Vikings to share around between the survivors. Get rid of the expensive powered aircraft by transfer of ownership - reduce the cost. Classic risk management - transfer the problem to SEP (SEP = Someone Else's Problem). As far as MoD is now concerned the wings can come off as well as the wheels - no longer their problem. Sold as seen Guv..........................

D and D (Devious and Dishonest)

It's enough to make you weep.

Arc

[ACW342]

As the aircraft were stated by the RAF to be irrecoverable it means that the VSOs involved have lied to at least two ministers of Defence (Reserve Forces) My MP, no longer sitting, and the MP for Strangford, Jim Shannon, within whose constituency lies 664 VGS, as was. I have notified MR. Shannon and my new MP of what is happening, Informing him that he has been lied to in the commons and also warned my new MP that his predecessor has been lied to. I have have asked them both to consider insisting on a judicial review in order to ascertain if Parliament has been lied to. I would suggest that every interested party on Pprune do like wise. The excrement really does need stirring.

[Whizz Bang]

As the aircraft were stated by the RAF to be irrecoverable it means that the VSOs involved have lied to at least two ministers of Defence (Reserve Forces) My MP, no longer sitting, and the MP for Strangford, Jim Shannon, within whose constituency lies 664 VGS, as was. I have notified MR. Shannon and my new MP of what is happening, Informing him that he has been lied to in the commons and also warned my new MP that his predecessor has been lied to. I have have asked them both to consider insisting on a judicial review in order to ascertain if Parliament has been lied to. I would suggest that every interested party on Pprune do like wise. The excrement really does need stirring.

ACW I assume you have a good chronological summary of events, I have some of the picture but would be glad of the factual bones to put some meat on, if you would be willing to share here.

[ACW342]

WB, I only know from the experiences related to me by the members of my old Son, 664. There are others who have greater knowledge than I though I do have some replies from my then MP and the then minister for reserve forces. I would suggest that someone on here with administrative and organisational capabilities could collate all our seperate recollections. I will over the next while try and sieve through this massive thread to see what I can glean, but hey, don't hold your breath. It is up to each of to contact/re-contact our MPs and ministers in who we might have communicated in the past. I don't think ministers who have made erroneous/untruthful statements in the HoC take kindly to having been led up the garden path by senior military officers and pliable civil servants.

ACW342

[POBJOY]

I was always suspicious of what was going on after muddleton got involved. For no good reason Civilians were deemed to be inappropriate to train Cadets in basic flying despite the cogent proof that this service had been one of the safest flying training organisations in the WORLD for decades. The apparent lack of any 'qualified ' persons who had any idea about flying or gliding actually heading up the whole organisation beggars belief, and the Corps has paid a high price for this total lack of capability.
I think it was all part of the grand scheme of things to make Syerston an Aerospace Camp that could also cover the limited gliding facility, and let the expanded AEF flights cover the Cadet flying availability.
This effectively reduced the requirement of a civilian element to zero, and hey presto problem solved.
The rumours surrounding the Vig fleet were numerous, however they all seemed capable of flying away from their normal base's, and the storage facility is not full of wrecks. Amazingly GROB who apparently had no capability to OH their own original engine now are to 'Modify' a portion of the fleet which includes a complete engine replacement (firewall forward) operation.
In fact GROB do not (on paper) have any glider interests anymore as this was sold on to another company. One day the aircraft is an aviation 'orphan' and then suddenly new parents are found !!. One scandal winds down to be replaced by another, and no one has fallen on a sword yet.

[POBJOY]

C**ts, the lot of them. Utter c**ts.

Not fair on CLOTS CF as clots usually are unaware of what is going on. This bunch knew exactly what was going on, and still do !!!
I assume you meant clots but were to polite to say so !!!!

[air pig]

As the aircraft were stated by the RAF to be irrecoverable it means that the VSOs involved have lied to at least two ministers of Defence (Reserve Forces) My MP, no longer sitting, and the MP for Strangford, Jim Shannon, within whose constituency lies 664 VGS, as was. I have notified MR. Shannon and my new MP of what is happening, Informing him that he has been lied to in the commons and also warned my new MP that his predecessor has been lied to. I have have asked them both to consider insisting on a judicial review in order to ascertain if Parliament has been lied to. I would suggest that every interested party on Pprune do like wise. The excrement really does need stirring.

Unfortunately, with the ACO, lying, obfuscation and outright deceit is a standard practice, at many if not all levels.

[POBJOY]

Unfortunately, with the ACO, lying, obfuscation and outright deceit is a standard practice, at many if not all levels.

Air Pig The disposal process seems to have been 'infected' to the same degree as the original chaos that brought us to having to dispose of the fleet in the first place.
The RAF have been guilty of using the process to keep the cabal system going thereby trying to prove that the fleet needed a complete makeover to fly again, blatantly untrue as is was.
Of course they did not have to convince a panel of impartial or tech observers that this was the best option as it was not part of the process. Interestingly Aerobility did not want ALL the airframes, but seem to have been used as a convenient 'buffer' to extract the machines from the system and let them drift back into the 'business sector'. As alluded this is probably as big a scandal as the original debacle that started it all.

[air pig]

Air Pig The disposal process seems to have been 'infected' to the same degree as the original chaos that brought us to having to dispose of the fleet in the first place.
The RAF have been guilty of using the process to keep the cabal system going thereby trying to prove that the fleet needed a complete makeover to fly again, blatantly untrue as is was.
Of course they did not have to convince a panel of impartial or tech observers that this was the best option as it was not part of the process. Interestingly Aerobility did not want ALL the airframes, but seem to have been used as a convenient 'buffer' to extract the machines from the system and let them drift back into the 'business sector'. As alluded this is probably as big a scandal as the original debacle that started it all.

Worse still McCafferty is on her way soon, useless woman and the previous one wasn't much better. With the contraction of the RAF over the past years the talent pool is very much diminished to recruit from. Any senior officer worth their salt will have a post retiremt job if they want it well lined up. that leaves ????

There are some posters on Air Cadet Central posting about this debacle but are having to go through FOIs, and are involving MPs and peers. I suspect as I have found in the past, they will be 'snowed' out by as I say lies obfuscation and deceit. The letter they sent to my MP was just a cut and paste job as evidenced by the FOI documents I had. I found the AOC and one of her RCs, unreilable and untruthful in their acts and omissions and that extended down to unit level.

[POBJOY]

Worse still McCafferty is on her way soon, useless woman and the previous one wasn't much better. With the contraction of the RAF over the past years the talent pool is very much diminished to recruit from. Any senior officer worth their salt will have a post retiremt job if they want it well lined up. that leaves ????

There are some posters on Air Cadet Central posting about this debacle but are having to go through FOIs, and are involving MPs and peers. I suspect as I have found in the past, they will be 'snowed' out by as I say lies obfuscation and deceit. The letter they sent to my MP was just a cut and paste job as evidenced by the FOI documents I had. I found the AOC and one of her RCs, unreilable and untruthful in their acts and omissions and that extended down to unit level.

Hi AP There was a real attempt to engage with the disposal process with the aim of returning some of the fleet (without modifications) for AE flying for youth organisations. It became obvious quite early in the process that a determined effort was being made to thwart this despite a very positive input from the LAA. In fact the LAA involvement was treated with some distain by those involved (such was their lack of knowledge of how much expertise the LAA have). The process took on a rather unusual turn when other parties made it their business to try and discredit the LAA route (probably because there was little or no contract work going to be needed), as it was a genuine volunteer low cost option that would have given max benefit of aircraft use and min cost of flying for those who would have benefitted. It would have not stopped Aerobility having machines for their purpose, but of course it also would not have involved another expensive exercise in pretending the fleet needed this 'treatment'. As per the whole of this dreadful sorry state of affairs, the Cadet organisation lost everything, and large amounts of money have been made / spent not providing an airborne service. This will not send waves of concern across the Country because there are plenty of other issues at present that would be seen as more important, but the subject is not closed, and no carpet in the world can cover it up. As mentioned, there have been many voiced concerns on the Cadets own forum, no one is being fooled by the rubbish emanating from Twatter control, and many respected ATC staff are well aware of how badly they have been let down by those at the top.

[air pig]

Hi AP There was a real attempt to engage with the disposal process with the aim of returning some of the fleet (without modifications) for AE flying for youth organisations. It became obvious quite early in the process that a determined effort was being made to thwart this despite a very positive input from the LAA. In fact the LAA involvement was treated with some distain by those involved (such was their lack of knowledge of how much expertise the LAA have). The process took on a rather unusual turn when other parties made it their business to try and discredit the LAA route (probably because there was little or no contract work going to be needed), as it was a genuine volunteer low cost option that would have given max benefit of aircraft use and min cost of flying for those who would have benefitted. It would have not stopped Aerobility having machines for their purpose, but of course it also would not have involved another expensive exercise in pretending the fleet needed this 'treatment'. As per the whole of this dreadful sorry state of affairs, the Cadet organisation lost everything, and large amounts of money have been made / spent not providing an airborne service. This will not send waves of concern across the Country because there are plenty of other issues at present that would be seen as more important, but the subject is not closed, and no carpet in the world can cover it up. As mentioned, there have been many voiced concerns on the Cadets own forum, no one is being fooled by the rubbish emanating from Twatter control, and many respected ATC staff are well aware of how badly they have been let down by those at the top.

But, if they can screw up the core ACO function of getting cadets flying whether AEF or to a wings 'standard' then they can't be relied upon to do anything riight, just look at the debacle about shooting as well. The organisation needs a large enema and some people clearing out. It is too much of a rest home for some those looking for a nice FTRS sinecure and have never been outside the fence (institution) into the real world.and had to survive.

[ExAscoteer2]

Worse still McCafferty is on her way soon, useless woman and the previous one wasn't much better.

That's what happens when you put a bloody Scribbly in charge of Ops! She's been about as effective as an ashtray on a motorbike. Sadly the Regional Commandants are no better. A complete failure of functional leadership at every level.

[air pig]

That's what happens when you put a bloody Scribbly in charge of Ops! She's been about as effective as an ashtray on a motorbike. Sadly the Regional Commandants are no better. A complete failure of functional leadership at every level.

I didn't like to mention 'blunties' but see what you get when pen wrestlers have control, no leadership risk adverse. ACTO 35 prohibits cadets flying in non service aircraft, so IF a large airline offered an experience flight to a unit, they can't flyin in it. You actually need aviators of the 'right' sort not the recent incumbents of some posts to move the ACO forward. Those people are few and far between aand they will have been snapped up by the private sector..

[POBJOY]

I didn't like to mention 'blunties' but see what you get when pen wrestlers have control, no leadership risk adverse. ACTO 35 prohibits cadets flying in non service aircraft, so IF a large airline offered an experience flight to a unit, they can't flyin in it. You actually need aviators of the 'right' sort not the recent incumbents of some posts to move the ACO forward. Those people are few and far between aand they will have been snapped up by the private sector..

I think we all know what the problem is and where.
Leadership (and its team) is critical, The Scouts seem to have got it, and look at their numbers not to mention their activities.
NEW broom required not the old one with new handle. Dib Dib Dib.

[teeteringhead]

Sadly the Regional Commandants are no better. And of course none are now aviators I understand.

A few years ago they all were, and had all been regular gp capts. Since the (Civil Service forced) change from ROs to FTRS, most, if not all are regular wg cdrs with "a promotion recommendation". Ex-regulars will be aware that NOT to get at least a "Rec" means you are pretty much no good.

So most of the RCs owe their "promotion" to the Comdt who - understandably - chooses people like herself. She too - unlike all her predecessors - gained promotion on moving (from retirement) to FTRS. She has undoubtedly done enormous amounts for the image of the Air Cadets; for flying, not so much. The paucity - or complete lack - of aviators amongst senior management meant that OC 2 FTS had little credible "peer review", to - if necessary - question and check him. All this may have had an influence on the course of events. That's not for me to judge.

[Auster Fan]

I think we all know what the problem is and where.
Leadership (and its team) is critical, The Scouts seem to have got it, and look at their numbers not to mention their activities.
NEW broom required not the old one with new handle. Dib Dib Dib.
As a former WGLO and Wing Aviation Officer, ACTO35 made me despair. The Air Scouts have certainly made it far simpler.

Last September, with a fellow syndicate member, I took our aircraft to Sywell for an annual Air Scouts Aviation Day. There, along with about eight or nine other aircraft and pilots who also gave their time for free, in one day we flew 112 Air Scouts on air experience trips. Although essentially extended circuits, without exception they loved every minute. I’m sure there must be good reasons(?), but why on earth the ACO couldn’t adopt similar regulations to those used by the Air Scouts, I really don’t know....

https://members.scouts.org.uk/por9.16

[ACW342]

Mr Julian Brazier (https://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/mr-julian-brazier/77) (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence) 10 th March 2016

In April 2014 all Air Cadet Organisation gliding was paused due to airworthiness concerns with the Grob Viking conventional glider and Grob Vigilant motor glider fleets utilised by the Air Cadet Volunteer Gliding Squadrons (VGS).

Substantial operational, technical and commercial negotiations with a range of aerospace leaders in this field have failed to find a value for money approach to successfully repair and recover all 146 gliders. Consequently a comprehensive Air Cadet Organisation review has proposed restructuring this activity. It has been decided that the best value for money solution is to recover at least 73 Vikings, a reduced Vigilant fleet of up to 15 aircraft, combined with an uplift to Grob Tutor fixed wing Air Experience Flights (AEFs).

The reduced glider fleet will be operated by significantly fewer, but larger, VGS, which will have a regional focus and be better integrated with synthetic training and increased AEF locations. The number of Grob Tutor aircraft beyond 2017 for AEF/ University Air Squadron (UAS) use will go from 45 to 70 airframes, enabling the enlargement of existing AEFs and the formation of two new AEFs. Regional VGS hubs, which have the facility to provide overnight accommodation, will be also created across the UK.

The Volunteer Gliding Squadrons that are due to be disbanded are: 611 Squadron currently based at RAF Honington, 612 Squadron currently based Dalton Barracks (Abingdon), 613 Squadron currently based at RAF Halton, 616 Squadron currently based at RAF Henlow, 618 Squadron currently based at RAF Odiham, 624 Squadron currently based at RMB Chivenor, 633 Squadron currently based at RAF Cosford, 634 Squadron currently based at MOD St Athan, 635 Squadron currently based at RAF Topcliffe, 636 Squadron currently based at Swansea Airport, 642 Squadron currently based at RAF Linton-on-Ouse, 662 Squadron currently based at RMB Arbroath, 663 Squadron currently based at Kinloss Barracks and 664 Squadron currently based at Newtownards.

The Volunteer Gliding Squadrons that are due to be retained are the Central Gliding School and 644 Squadron currently based at RAF Syerston, 614 Squadron currently based at MDP Wethersfield, 615 Squadron currently based at RAF Kenley, 622 Squadron currently based at Trenchard Lines Upavon, 626 Squadron currently based at RNAS Predannack, 631 Squadron currently based at RAF Woodvale, 632 Squadron currently based at RAF Ternhill, 637 Squadron currently based at RAF Little Rissington, 661 Squadron currently based at RAF Kirknewton and 645 Squadron currently based at Topcliffe (from October 2019). 621 Squadron currently based at Hullavington will be retained at RNAS Merryfield.

As part of this process, a number of regional gliding hubs are to be created. We also expect that 2 new Air Experience Flights will be created, 13 AEF and 14 AEF. It is anticipated that 14 AEF will be located in Northern Ireland.

While work is undertaken to set up this new structure, the future locations of these Squadrons remains subject to the outcome of MOD estate rationalisation due to announce later this year. While it is likely that many Squadrons will remain at their current locations, we are working to ensure that, where this is not the case, flying opportunities will be made available to Cadet Units within their region and any new locations will be as geographically close to the existing locations as possible.

We recognise that this means that some uncertainty will remain for our cadets, but we are confident that this new structure will maximise flying opportunities for them.

As VGS are run by volunteer staffs, this will not result in any job losses, albeit volunteering options will be affected. The RAF is extremely grateful for the volunteers that support each VGS; without this support Air Cadet gliding would not be possible. Consequently we will develop a crossover plan which will enable many volunteer gliding instructors who become surplus on affected VGS to convert to Viking; transfer to a formally established ground cadre within a VGS; transfer their instructional skill sets into the units of the mainstream Air Cadet Organisation; or to retrain to fly the Grob Tutor in the expanded AEF construct.

The RAF remains committed to Air Cadet flying and will ultimately increase investment in the VGS and AEF sites which will remain to include the provision of residential accommodation for cadets and staff. This will enable those cadet units which have to travel greater distances to the VGS to undertake a residential weekend, with better associated force development and ground training opportunities alongside the gliding and flying. With the introduction of glider simulators, funded by the RAF Charitable Trust, the Air Cadet Organisation have developed a common syllabus for cadet flying which better integrates and allocates cadet flying opportunities between realistic synthetic flight simulation, glider flying and an uplift of AEF flights.

We will make a further statement when we can say more on basing.”

[pr00ne]

So, has there been any effect whatsoever on RAF recruiting between 2014 and now?

[Shaft109]

'So, has there been any effect whatsoever on RAF recruiting between 2014 and now?'

No, but that's not the whole point of the organisation these days.

[POBJOY]

So, has there been any effect whatsoever on RAF recruiting between 2014 and now?

IT has not been the main reason for the organisation for many years, however no Cadets will have been impressed by the lack of a facility that was such a potential highlight of being a member. There is still an enormous interest in aviation and many of those with an 'interest' do so by flying models and nowadays drones. When I speak to youngsters engaged in these activities I always ask if they have considered the Air Cadets as an option !!! Sadly in many of the cases they actually had been along to a unit but were soon to realise it lacked a real connection with aviation, and hence they drifted off to engage with an activity that could do so. In a couple of cases it also prompted the decision NOT to look at the service for a future.
Judging by the current run of TV adverts for the RAF, and RAF reserves we can only assume there are no queues at the centres so something is not working.
To be fair the Cadet operation of the 60s-70s was a very hands on and well led organisation, plus not festooned with sheds loads of paperwork. Those involved were frequently former service and indeed so were the civilian instructors. All youth organisations now have to contend with mountains of paperwork and endless 'checks' therefore it is no wonder that they struggle to attract adult staff. The organisations that do not loose sight of their reason to exist, and have quality LEADERSHIP are the ones that still thrive.

[mattandmoosdad]

Hi all, first time poster here and apologies, no connection to military aviation other than a keen interest in such things.

My son has his first induction evening with our local ATC squadron tomorrow. He's aviation mad, devoured the contents of their website and has talked of nothing since we got the date for his first evening.

I've partly read through this thread (it's huge and may have missed relevant posts) with interest but left wondering: are there any airframes left within the ATC for opportunities for flying and/or gliding and despite what has been going on with the air experience side of things (and I can't pretend to fully understand) is the organisation still worth being part of for an aviation enthused youngster?

Regards MAMD

[Glider111]

Easy answer, yes.

More complex answer:

The organisation has always been about more than flying and gliding and is about developing young people. Like anything it depends on individual personnel running squadrons but for the low cost of annual subs it is well worth at least trying and letting your son see if he enjoys it.

On the flying and gliding side, flying is broadly back to as it was for now with the Tutor repaired and still doing its job. Gliding is continuing to rebuild but gets better by the day. Is never likely to be back to the pre pause rate of gliding which is a shame but is something no one can do anything about without a lot of money.

So basically the air cadets are not grounded, the real title of the thread should reflect people’s understandable frustration with the chain of events that led to a smaller but still excellent cadet gliding organisation.

[boswell bear]

Hi all, first time poster here and apologies, no connection to military aviation other than a keen interest in such things.

My son has his first induction evening with our local ATC squadron tomorrow. He's aviation mad, devoured the contents of their website and has talked of nothing since we got the date for his first evening.

I've partly read through this thread (it's huge and may have missed relevant posts) with interest but left wondering: are there any airframes left within the ATC for opportunities for flying and/or gliding and despite what has been going on with the air experience side of things (and I can't pretend to fully understand) is the organisation still worth being part of for an aviation enthused youngster?

Regards MAMD

Hi

Yes there are still AEF Squadrons flying Tutors and VGS flying Viking gliders and deliver Part Task Training (Simulators) the gliding side is much reduced but in theory there are more aircraft to come back online.

Also yes the organisation is still worth being part of for an aviation enthused youngster.

[bobward]

lMatt etc
I joined the ATC as a cadet in 1965. I left in 2018, after having 'done' 40+ years as an instructor, including 25 in uniform.
It was he best thing I ever did (apart from marrying Mrs W of course). I learned a lot, and used it when I started work.
Because the Corps is open to anyone, the mix of character types is huge: cadets have to earn to get on with each other,
and how to take, and eventually give, orders.

I'm sure I would have been hard pressed to have had the modest success I had in the day job without all the stuff I learned in the ACO.
There will be a certain amount of BS and waffle in your son's early days as a cadet. Stick with it as it will get better and then see how far you can go.

Good luck and enjoy the ride!

[chevvron]

lMatt etc
I joined the ATC as a cadet in 1965. I left in 2018, after having 'done' 40+ years as an instructor, including 25 in uniform.
It was he best thing I ever did (apart from marrying Mrs W of course). I learned a lot, and used it when I started work.
Because the Corps is open to anyone, the mix of character types is huge: cadets have to earn to get on with each other,
and how to take, and eventually give, orders.

I'm sure I would have been hard pressed to have had the modest success I had in the day job without all the stuff I learned in the ACO.
There will be a certain amount of BS and waffle in your son's early days as a cadet. Stick with it as it will get better and then see how far you can go.

Good luck and enjoy the ride!
Joined in '62 and was refused a continuance of service in '98 after 36 years service (commisioned in '79) at the age of 51 as I was spending too much time at the VGS and not enough at the squadron because the Sqdn Cdr who took the squadron over from me never gave me anything to do; well I was supposed to be WGLO after all! It wasn't until later that year I learned that WGLO had become an established Wing Staff post and not just 'co-opted' as I had been, a fact my Wg Cdr must have known when he 'sacked' me.
Maybe my getting invited to a Royal Garden Party at 'the Palace' and my Wg Cdr NOT beng invited had something to do with it!
Otherwise I echo bobwards statement.

[mattandmoosdad]

Chevvron, bobward, boswellbar and Glider111

Many thanks for your encouraging replies. It doesn't seem as bad as I first thought. I'm sure he'll love it and the ATC clearly offers so much more. I just didn't want him to be disappointed about the opportunities (or lack of) for flying.

Cheers all

MAMD

[muppetofthenorth]

Chevvron, bobward, boswellbar and Glider111

Many thanks for your encouraging replies. It doesn't seem as bad as I first thought. I'm sure he'll love it and the ATC clearly offers so much more. I just didn't want him to be disappointed about the opportunities (or lack of) for flying.

Cheers all

MAMD
Even when there was lots of it available, it wasn't as if they were going every week. If he's joining a big unit then those chances will be spread around.

The likelihood is, if he's dead keen and his school are agreeable to let him have the odd day off, he'll get 2-3 flying days a year... maybe 2 Tutor trips and a day or two at a glider unit. But a lot of that depends on where the sqn is and how available the staff are - remember, every single member of staff on that squadron he's joining is a volunteer and doing it in addition to their day job.

Coincidentally, we had our bi-annual open evening last night and the parents of all the potential newbies almost refused to believe we were volunteers and not full time paid staff...

[treadigraph]

Pobjoy tells me that thinks this would make an excellent Cadet A E machine. Tea to be served during flight and no parachute or helmet required. Still space to operate out of Croydon with a quick turn to avoid the flats !!!!


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/640x460/hp42_da5e463e2583c791342a9d44efbd600ecf6af282.jpg

I was up on Kenley Aerodrome a couple of weeks ago and it was good to see the new 615 HQ building alongside the hangar - it seems to have gone up very quickly indeed. If I can, I'll pop up Sunday and see if there any signs of flying.

[POBJOY]

Treads This is Hanno in the M East to join 599 VGS. Chap on the left has just shown up from nowhere asking if they need any Staff Cadets !!! Nothing changes.
None of the old girls survived WW2 (many parked out in gales) not surprising, rather like 6 T21,s all out in a squall.
Hopefully this coming Easter should see some progress on the Gliding front assuming the C Virus keeps at bay.
Best Wishes to those who stayed with it and do the real Venture Adventure.

[chevvron]

Treads This is Hanno in the M East to join 599 VGS. Chap on the left has just shown up from nowhere asking if they need any Staff Cadets !!! Nothing changes.
None of the old girls survived WW2 (many parked out in gales) not surprising, rather like 6 T21,s all out in a squall.
Hopefully this coming Easter should see some progress on the Gliding front assuming the C Virus keeps at bay.
Best Wishes to those who stayed with it and do the real Venture Adventure.
I think I read they were flown to Bristol Whitchurch (aka Hengrove Park) where most were destroyed by gales.

[ShyTorque]

Looks like Beagle in the pith helmet.

[lsh]

Are you taking the pith?!

lsh
:E

[chevvron]

Are you taking the pith?!

lsh
:E
Yeth and he's only thixteen.

[Arclite01]

So has Corona Virus stopped the VGS again ??

Arc

[muppetofthenorth]

So has Corona Virus stopped the VGS again ??
Arc
Stopped the entire ATC. All cadet "face to face activity" has been cancelled.

[chevvron]

So has Corona Virus stopped the VGS again ??

Arc
I'm told the red arrows are 'pinching' the airspace over Syerston for a couple of days next week.

[teeteringhead]

The Head Girl has said all cancelled until end of May.

[WB627]

The Scout Association has done the same, so don't feel the ACO has been singled out for special treatment.

[Flugplatz]

Not stopped... "paused"

[ACW562]

I for one am appalled at the way the Air Cadets have been let down by those in charge at the top; but despite this the organisation still has a shed load of brand new winches and a quantity of 'refurbished' Vikings. Apart from anything else 2FTS will still want to keep themselves employed, and in the case of Kenley which serves the largest catchment area of all they have been provided with a brand new HQ on what is a secure site. The Vigilants have been killed off due to the lack of will to engage with the engine issue of being on extension, and despite an LAA based project to sort this out it no doubt suited those who wanted to 'bury the dead' for the patient to stay dead. The Vikings have now been effectively given an extra life, so with Kenley (615), (and soon 626) getting new facilities I think there must be a 10 year future at least. This is enough time to look at, and organise replacement equipment if the budget and will exists.
Either way although we will not see the organisation 'as it was' it at least still gives an 'AIR' element to those Cadets who aspire to train to solo standard.

I have said it before. And again........During WW2 and austerity years that followed. Rationing continued etc. The RAF and MOD formed Air Cadet Gliding. Its was not for the want of people to join the RAF as they were being de mobbed any way. Fast forward to the last decade !!! It does not make sense. But wait ! That police inspector in me tells me the bean counters and the anti Air Cadet Gliding type of RAF officer with promotion and job security in mind with pension to look forward to, has something to do with it. Sad. So sad.

[ACW562]

BGA are talking of recommending putting perspex glass between two seat cockpits. Plus alternatives such as two way radios in the one aircraft. ME THINKS THE VIRUS WILL FIND WAYS INTO THE GAPS. Try again.

[ACW562]

Is there any news on when 631 (Woodvale) may RTF ?

None flying. Ground training !!

[ACW562]

[QUOTE=Bill Macgillivray;10696720]Pobjoy,

I have tried to keep out of this debate for years. As an ex-ATC cadet who went solo in a T31 in 1953 and then joined the RAF as a pilot because of the influence of the ATC (and my desire) I am saddened to see the way things have gone! I am not out of touch, having been a CI at my local ATC squadron until a couple of years ago, and having flown gliders and various powered aircraft all my working life. I feel that the Air Training Corps (or Cadets, RAF Section?!) have lost their main reason for being! However, having followed this thread (and your first class explantions) I do sense that all is not lost with the people who really matter! Please keep up the good work!

Bill, Indeed I to am furious at the needless waste of resources, and loss of a valuable experience to a huge number of Cadets who have been badly let down.
However we have a new boss at 2 FTS who must be given the chance to see the organisation gets 'enabled' to rise again even though we know it not be to the same level. The two new return to flying operations both have a chance to help this situation. 615 Kenley is in a prime location for Cadet Squadrons to access, and I know that it will rise to the occasion because both 615 and Kenley have a history of survival, delivering the goods, and the will to provide an excellent service.
626 at Predannack is a remote location but has a fantastic site with lots of space. Staffing may well be an issue there, but if 2 FTS are allowed to think outside of the box and utilise outside temporary help then this could be a great summer camp location with perhaps some staff coming down to run continuous courses, in the same way Halesland operated. Once Cadets see the gliding opportunities coming online it will be an excellent chance for them to get stuck in and help out with staffing and then the process can build again. This is what the organisation needs, hands on association with aircraft you can actually help to handle and get to fly, that's what the Air Cadets should be about for those who are keen. A bit of a 'hill' to climb, but better than letting it go without a fight. Venture Adventure, and B...... the twitter and facebook brigade. Regards Pobjoy.

Just read the above. No hope I am afraid. The people dealing with the Air Cadets at RAF and MOD level are at the bottom of the barrel. Muck any churns out muck. They dont want to be in the job they have. So they demonstrate to their superiors they have made savings and so they move on up the ranks/grades. Long may their fall be !!!

[ACW562]

Speaking as someone in the organisation currently, I know I speak for many when I say we simply don't see that happening.

The RAF and the MoD hates the risk it exposes them to, and if they can reduce / remove that risk and cost, they will.

With certain other changes in the air cadets in the last couple of years it'll be a minor miracle if the entire organisation is still here in 15-20 years time.


Cynical me BUT.... The RAF/Navy/Army could not mount another Falklands effort in the current climate. So not much chance of RAF Air Cadet Gliding getting any support.

[ACW562]

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1460x2000/631_raf_sealand_circa_1968_687263473301f161ba8295f761523c07a e6acb1b.jpeg
631GS . RAF Sealand . Circa 1968

[chevvron]

What's that Grasshopper doing flying OVER the launch point to land?
Strictly verboten at 613.

[muppetofthenorth]

Cynical me BUT.... The RAF/Navy/Army could not mount another Falklands effort in the current climate. So not much chance of RAF Air Cadet Gliding getting any support.
That was pretty much my point.

[Green Flash]

Are their any other countries in, say, NATO, that has a similar organisation as the RAF Air Cadets (or Army or Navy Cadets, for that matter?). My point being, that if there isn't, someone somewhere might just say 'well, they manage to recruit OK to their Armed Forces, why are we spending money on the Cadets?' :(

[muppetofthenorth]

Are their any other countries in, say, NATO, that has a similar organisation as the RAF Air Cadets (or Army or Navy Cadets, for that matter?). My point being, that if there isn't, someone somewhere might just say 'well, they manage to recruit OK to their Armed Forces, why are we spending money on the Cadets?' :(
In terms of Europe and main allies there's this list of countries who take part in the International Air Cadet Exchange;
https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircadets/what-we-do/adventurous-training/international-air-cadet-exchange/

Quite a few are NATO.

[BossEyed]

What's that Grasshopper doing flying OVER the launch point to land?
Strictly verboten at 613.
Camera angle and lens foreshortening, I would bet.

[622]

Camera angle and lens foreshortening, I would bet.
I must admit I spent a few minutes looking at that picture trying to work out what that strange glider was.. ….until I realised it was a perfectly timed picture of an overflight! :O

[Prangster]

My grandson had his first glider flight at Syerston a few days before the lockdown happened. It's done its job....620 Squadron ATC now has an enthused member who is already considering an aircrew career....and thats all that matters

[VX275]

Are their any other countries in, say, NATO, that has a similar organisation as the RAF Air Cadets (or Army or Navy Cadets, for that matter?). My point being, that if there isn't, someone somewhere might just say 'well, they manage to recruit OK to their Armed Forces, why are we spending money on the Cadets?' :(

Belgium and they still glide.
https://www.facebook.com/Royal-Belgian-Air-Cadets-705725326257507/

[chevvron]

VX275: Do you know where 'Mrs Heppell' is at the moment; somebody on the 'other' forum asked after I mentioned I had pranged it.

[VX275]

The last I heard of Mrs Hepple was that she was languishing in the RAF Museum's store at Stafford. She went to Stafford straight from RAF Saint Athan where she had been used on the last RAF wood workers course. She should be in good condition with no evidence of your mistreatment showing.

[RAFEngO74to09]

The Belgian Air Cadets Gliding Program is in a different league altogether - very selective and prospective candidates must have the academic ability that would be required to join either the Belgian Air Component or the airlines.

Selection for the 3-year program - around 50 slots a year for the entire country - is highly competitive and by interview held at the Belgian MOD.

For instance, 5 of the 6 F-16 pilots on this course in 2017 had previously been in the Belgian Air Cadets Gliding Program.
https://www.aviation24.be/military-aircraft/belgian-air-component/six-belgian-air-force-pilots-graduated-f-16-pilots/

All flying is done at periodic camps a couple of times a year with pre-requisite academics to be passed first.

Global Air Power Media - Belgian Air Cadets (http://www.globalairpowermedia.com/files/articles/bel-aircadets.html)

A few course videos here give a flavor of the equipment used and the type of cadet selected:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1Sen6h6sbA&list=PLDsVOwPLcgocUb5i3JzZW5lm7VcXFlhtG&index=10

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVDJG_4NQ_k&list=PLDsVOwPLcgocUb5i3JzZW5lm7VcXFlhtG&index=9

[Big Pistons Forever]

The Canadian Air Cadet gliding program has consistently allowed over 200 cadets a year to gain a full Canadian Glider Pilot license during a 6 week summer camp. For the rest of the year glider experience flights are flown on weekends, many by licensed cadet pilots.

Obviously everything is on hold right now, but a robust gliding program with cadets flying solo is not rocket science, it just needs leadership that supports putting the air in Air Cadets.

[muppetofthenorth]

.Obviously everything is on hold right now, but a robust gliding program with cadets flying solo is not rocket science, it just needs leadership that supports putting the air in Air Cadets.
There are rumours of a new Commandant coming in this summer who will be more capable of leading than the shower we've recently been lumbered with.

[478152]

Latest Faceache update from present CAC said that next Commandant has been decided, although name etc hasn't been released to the masses formally yet.

[chevvron]

The last I heard of Mrs Hepple was that she was languishing in the RAF Museum's store at Stafford. She went to Stafford straight from RAF Saint Athan where she had been used on the last RAF wood workers course. She should be in good condition with no evidence of your mistreatment showing.
My 'mistreatment' occured on 17 May 1967. The only damage visible was a broken main skid so the Officer i/c (the late Chris Rollings who put up 'B' Cat wings whilst still a Cadet W/O) initially wanted to fly her out of the field where I put her, however getting a winch in there was going to be difficult so we pulled the fence of the field (which adjoined the airfield) out of the ground and towed her back to the hangar.
When MGSP inspected her however, they assessed her as Cat 5; normally a write off but as she was a presentation aircraft, she was sent back to Kirbymoorside to be rebuilt.
I next flew her again at Halton on 20 May 1968 almost exactly a year later and last flew her at White Waltham on 13 Jun 1976 where my logbook says we managed a trip of 32 min; not bad when Heathrow arrivals were passing overhead at 3,000ft amsl limiting the height you could climb to!
So as you say, after (effectively) two re-builds, she should be in good condition.

[VX275]

When the 'Flight' magazine archive was searchable I found this article about the presentation of 275 to the Cadets.
VX275 presentation.pdf (https://www.pprune.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=6039&stc=1&d=1588762881)
Arguably she's a T21 and not a Sedburgh not having been purchased by the Air Cadets.

[brokenlink]

Muppetofthenorth - I do hope your information is correct.

[Arclite01]

Great to see those Belgian kids having fun.

Lots of flying, lots of happy smiling faces !!, not huge amounts of expensive kit, just adequate, in the right amounts.

Well done Royal Belgian Air Cadets !!

Arc

So good I watched them twice !!

[huge72]

VX275, now there's a blast from the past, I last flew in her at 613 Halton on 7th Sept 69 whilst on a gliding scholarship, whilst I was a CCF cadet from Newbury. Stalling and Spinning with Mr Bird as the instructor. Those early days led to a 40 year air force career and 10500 hrs on Wessex, Hercules and VC10. Who would have thought that I would now all those years later be OC at my local ATC unit and hopefully when we are up and running again sending my young cadets gliding.

[David Thompson]

RAF Stafford , the RAF Museum Reserve Collection in June 2017 . Could this be Mrs Hepple ?
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x768/vx2751_073283d559686fee32439a078c018e5523882820.jpg
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x768/vx2752_8f3236c3a5b8d4df6d82333730a9f8fa9dbfbbe0.jpg

Apologies for the size of the images and if anyone would like copies please PM me .

[chevvron]

Definitelly Mrs Heppell (corrected spelling)
The basic T21 fuselage appears to be the same design as that used on the T4 Falcon 111 of 1935, the original swept wing being replaced by an elegant straight wing which was an upscaled copy of the Grunau Baby wing.
According to Wiki, the sole prototype T21 first flew in 1944 but was rejected by the RAF and post war was sold to the London Gliding Club. They suggested various improvements resulting in the T21A which first flew in 1947. Only one of these was built but the RAF ordered an improved version for ATC Gliding Schools to be designated T21b Sedbergh TX1 having been originally given the Slingsby type number T28, the first T21b flying in Dec 1947.
226 T21bs were built for the UK civil and military market plus overseas sales so VX275 would have been a T21b from this production run.
In Oct 1966, I flew a T21 at Lasham which was named 'Daisy' (no BGA number as far as I'm aware) and which I was told at the time was the sole T21A, the only perceptible difference from the standard 'barge' being an elevator trimmer which I must admit, could have been fitted later.
It was 7 months later that my actions (trying to be 'clever') caused VX275 to be rebuilt by Slingsbys.

[VX275]

The one difference from the other Barges Mrs Heppell had was a shorter mainwheel box. You only noticed this when lifting the tail to stop the tailskid wearing out when crossing tarmac, you couldn't lift 275's tail as high as the others without the nose skid grounding. That and the fact that she had a presentation plaque on the cockpit bulkhead.

[chevvron]

The one difference from the other Barges Mrs Heppell had was a shorter mainwheel box. You only noticed this when lifting the tail to stop the tailskid wearing out when crossing tarmac, you couldn't lift 275's tail as high as the others without the nose skid grounding. That and the fact that she had a presentation plaque on the cockpit bulkhead.
Had a stencil either side of the nose in the days I flew her.
I managed to rip the mainskid off (ground looped) so the bit above about the mainwheel explains that because I certainly didn't try to ground the mainskid for braking.

[chevvron]

63 ex Air Cadet Vigilants have been purchased by Aerobility using a grant from the DfT and will be re-engined with Rotax engines and Garmin avionics in order to achieve CAA airworthiness requirements.

[VX275]

63 ex Air Cadet Vigilants have been purchased by Aerobility using a grant from the DfT and will be re-engined with Rotax engines and Garmin avionics in order to achieve CAA airworthiness requirements.
What about all those 'non airworthy' airframe repairs?

[Bigpants]

https://ukga.com/news/view?contentId=48392

Fear not all can be fixed to the satisfaction of the CAA and the aircraft sold on with a warranty.

Sooooo why did the MoD not do that for the ACO several years ago then?

[Martin the Martian]

I guess that will forever remain one of the great mysteries of aviation...

[chevvron]

https://ukga.com/news/view?contentId=48392

Fear not all can be fixed to the satisfaction of the CAA and the aircraft sold on with a warranty.

Sooooo why did the MoD not do that for the ACO several years ago then?
They couldn't find anyone at MOD with the 'guts' to sign it off; all too close to their pension and automatic promotion.

[Engines]

Guys,

The reasons for this sad and wholly avoidable episode aren't a 'mystery'. The way to fix this didn't require 'guts', and it didn't need anyone to 'sign it off'. Perhaps I can help explain.

In 2014, the RAF found itself unable to establish whether its Viking and Vigilant fleets were airworthy. They found out because they badly failed at the first hurdle of becoming certified as a 'Continuous Airworthiness Management Organisation' (CAMO) - this new system had been introduced by the MAA some time before. 2FTS were unable to get that certification, as they lacked almost all of the required capabilities, systems and people to do the job. Meanwhile, the Engineering Authority found that it couldn't present a sufficient case for 'Type Airworthiness'. To repeat a point I've made before, the reason that these organisations were unable to do this weren't the 'new' MAA rules (As Tuc and I have often pointed out, the vast majority of the MAA's regulations are clearly derived from previous airworthiness regs.) The reason was a long running failure across all levels and departments to carry out the basic tasks of managing a fleet of military aircraft. These failures happened at all stages, starting with rushed procurement to spend 'in year funds', and continued through into service with a failure to maintain the fleet, including inadequate inspections and surveys of what was going on. It's certainly not a mystery.

In my view, what was even more remarkable was that when the whole thing came to a juddering halt in early 2014, 2FTS had absolutely no idea how serious the situation was and then spent 18 months failing to get a grip of it. To my mind this indicates a systemic lack of understanding of basic airworthiness management at the higher levels of the RAF. Subsequently, wholly misleading press releases and Ministerial statements were made in an effort to hide the seriousness of the situation. Given all this, 'signing off' the fleets wouldn't have required 'guts' - it would have required a moron.

It's been a true scandal, and reflects badly on those who led the various engineering and technical organisations that utterly failed to do a their jobs, which in turn led to children being put at risk in RAF aircraft. One has to hope that lessons have, this time, been actually learned.

Best regards as ever to all those good engineers who have stepped forward since then and done their level best to salvage what they could out of this mess,

Engines

[Chugalug2]

Thanks Engines, you paint a sombre and unedifying picture of a dysfunctional system that couldn't organise the proverbial piss-up if it wanted to. What I would plead for is that every one who reads your posts realises that the scandal that is ACO gliders is but one tree in a Service wide forest of dysfunction. The same incompetence and negligence exposed here extends throughout UK Military Aviation. The results have been explored in the far too many fatal accident threads that besmirch this Forum. Sadly there will be more. What is the point of experienced and highly qualified members like yourself and tuc dissecting the likes of Mull, Nimrod, Hercules, Sea King, Tornado, and Red Arrows fatal accidents to reveal the common denominator as here, ie loss/lack of airworthiness, if no meaningful reform is enacted?

Even if the MAA could have presided over a return to airworthiness of the Vigilants as the CAA has done (and I personally doubt that it could), it would not wish to do so. Any undue attention drawn to military unairworthiness invites questions as to why it is so prevalent. That in turn draws renewed focus back onto Haddon-Cave's so called Golden Period of UK Military Airworthiness, which of course was anything but. The reason these simple aircraft, and far more complex ones, became unairworthy harks beck to that era of deliberate and malevolent attacks by RAF VSOs on UK Military Air Safety. They merely wanted access to the ring fenced monies that funded the continuous process that is airworthiness, but in accessing the former (to cover VSO incompetence) they destroyed the latter. Rebuilding the structure to start down the necessary path of reform requires a fundamental change for the MAA and the MAAIB (or whatever the latest sign writer's efforts might now read). They both need to be made independent of the MOD and of each other. Until then the lie that Haddon-Cave bequeathed us, and the MAA views as sacred text, still stands. Unairworthiness will go on infecting the military air fleets and avoidable deaths will simply continue.

Self Regulation Doesn't Work and in Aviation It Kills!

[tucumseh]

I'm surprised that this latest news hasn't drawn more comment. If I could just add to the excellent posts of Engines and Chug.

At the time the systemic failures came to a head;

1. Gliders and Hawks shared the same Type Airworthiness Authority.
2. Neither had a valid Safety Case.
3. Hawk XX177 (Flt Lt Sean Cunningham) and Glider grounding would both have been avoided by implementing the mandated (in all aviation contracts) Defence Standard 05-125/2, and its accompanying Specifications 1-20.

If you want to go back further, the same applies to Tornado ZG710, Nimrod XV230 and many more.

There's a lesson there but MoD doesn't want to see it, its reaction being to cancel the Def Stan without replacement. The result was that Gliders had no appointed Design Authority. This news release tells us that under the new arrangement, Grob is once again the appointed DA to the new owners, and lo and behold it will take a year to resurrect the build standard, allowing the aircraft to be recertified, made serviceable and even upgraded. As stated so many times here, the solution was simple. It just needed MoD to follow its legal obligations. It didn't, but many postholders made false declarations that they had. As they did in the Sean Cunningham case, and all the others. After so many fatal accidents, so much wasted money, and the Nimrod and Mull of Kintyre Reviews citing the same failures, that MUST have been a conscious decision. Overseen by MoD's 'independent' MAA.

[Bigpants]

Really enjoyed reading the last handful of posts as it sums up the fiasco nicely and perhaps justifies allowing a prune thread to run on for some years in order that as the facts unfold a clearer truer picture emerges? Of course there will be many vested interests who would like to see pprune removed altogether but while many posts may be inaccurate or just plain wrong I think it provides a public service and aviation is the better for it.

[air pig]

This is the new Commandant. This an interview given as an A4 force commander.

https://www.raf.mod.uk/our-organisation/stations/raf-wittering/news/interview-with-the-station-commander/

[ASRAAMTOO]

Closing the stable door perhaps. Now if only there had been an engineer in charge BEFORE they gave all the aircraft and gliders away maybe he could have come up with a way to fix them.

[tucumseh]

ASRAAMTOO

Agreed, but he/she wouldn't need to come up with a way. It's a job for one of his/her most junior staff, who 'simply' had to follow the regs, which is all Aerobility and Grob will be doing now. But as time passed, and more and more senior people failed, it would have been embarrassing to admit this, so my guess is it was never attempted in any serious way.

The contractual relationship (if any) between Grob and MoD is key. Grob own the IPR and hold the Master Drawing Set. Therefore, if they were not contracted direct to be the Design Authority, then whoever did the job could only be the Design Custodian (with limited authority and role), and only then if MoD directed a sub-contract on Grob to provide a set of Secondary Masters, and maintain them through a support agreement. In such cases, if the DA is deemed a suitable company to design, build and supply the aircraft in the first place, one might ask why bother with a Custodian... Either MoD didn't want to use Grob, or Grob didn't want the job. But either way, they still needed to be contracted, for (ultimately) Safety Case reasons. Therein lies a primary root cause. That's why I mention the only Def Stan that has ever set out the detailed procedures for doing this work. It's the Bible, and anyone in MoD involved in this area should know it backwards, long before they ever get promoted into a project team. Until 1992, everyone who did this stuff received a personal maintained copy (i.e. you were named in the Amendment List distribution). That may be unique in MoD, and is indicative of how important it all was.

[WE992]

I see that the first Vigilant (ZJ968) has appeared on the UK Civil register as G-IDOO.

[DaveUnwin]

Amazing. For six years the RAF/MoD/ACO spectacularly failed to achieve anything with regard to the Vigilantes, and yet within what - six weeks -there's been real progress towards returning some to airworthy status. Real progress that has been made, remember, in the middle of a pandemic. Quite remarkable.

[DaveUnwin]

Six years to do nothing - six weeks to do loads. There we all were thinking that if takes six years to do nothing that in engineering terms the Vigilant must be something like a cross between a Starfighter and a Space Shuttle, and it turned out it was actually a fixed-undercarriage glider with a VW Beetle engine stuck on the front. Who knew?

[teeteringhead]

Who knew? Most of us.....

[POBJOY]

I see that the first Vigilant (ZJ968) has appeared on the UK Civil register as G-IDOO.

Apparently it should have been G-DODO, and it is still classed as a SLMG. Since when did the CAA get involved with those !!! I thought the BGA / LAA covered them.

No sense in spending all that money on an old airframe (Oh of course its not their money) Perhaps the Police should be informed seeing as the Cadets had all these airframes stolen from them.

[BEagle]

G-IDOO is an EASA aircraft certified as a CS-22A : Sailplane or Powered Sailplane - Utility Category.

It is a fixed-wing self-launching motor glider.

[NutLoose]

https://ukaviation.news/former-air-cadet-gliders-get-new-lease-of-life-with-aerobility/

1st comment says it all.

[POBJOY]

Of course once you accept that the fiasco has happened then you could implement 'damage limitation'.
Aerobility only wanted 10 machines, so why could not the rest get the same treatment and carry on the work they were doing.
I think it was all part of getting 'power' out of the volunteer element of VGS and boosting the AEF flights.
Even 40 Vigs spread around the country could impact on the Air element of the RAF Cadets and be positioned to access the regions that have poor 'mainstream' AEF coverage.
There would certainly not be a staffing problem and indeed much useful experience would have been retained to the benefit of all.
A powerful lobby from the head of 2FTS could have impacted on this, but of course it was not in his mind to see 'Volunteers' in the system at all, and the so called 'leadership' at Cranwell thought the Cadet movement was all about twatter and facebook not about flying.
With the true cost of firewall forward replacement and 'new' cockpit fit plus certification probably being around £60k per machine it would still be better value for money to have these SLMG giving AE countywide than loosing them from the system.
Perhaps the new BOSS at Cranwell could look at this,he certainly has the right background.

[BEagle]

Now that Air Cadet gliding has started again at Little Rissington, some questions:

1. How many Viking gliders are based there?
2. Roughly how many launches per day are there?
3. Does Air Cadet gliding take place outside the promulgated gliding site (2nm / 2800' amsl)?

Since Mar 2017, there have been 2 x Viking vs. GA airproxes at Little Rissington; one was outside the gliding site and the other was held to be a Class E event, in which normal separation was maintained.

2FTS are seeking an ACP to establish an ATZ at Little Rissington, which would be active at weekends and on Public Holidays, other times by NOTAM. When the ATZ is not active nor is other NOTAM'd military activity taking place, would the site still be considered to be an active gliding site even though there was nobody there?

Can an ATZ really be justified?

[Big Pistons Forever]

The Canadian Air Cadet program has had to cancel this summers gliding and powered airplane camps due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This is a gut punch to those selected as they will probably not get another opportunity to learn to fly. The good news is the Air Cadets are well into a factory remanufacture program for their 2-33 gliders. They are going back to the factory and getting a total overhaul with a 20 year life extension. This combined with the recent new tow plane program will ensure that a robust gliding program will be maintained for the foreseeable future.

[POBJOY]

The Canadian Air Cadet program has had to cancel this summers gliding and powered airplane camps due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This is a gut punch to those selected as they will probably not get another opportunity to learn to fly. The good news is the Air Cadets are well into a factory remanufacture program for their 2-33 gliders. They are going back to the factory and getting a total overhaul with a 20 year life extension. This combined with the recent new tow plane program will ensure that a robust gliding program will be maintained for the foreseeable future.
That's what you get when the organisation is well lead and tech competent. I suspect they will even find a way to look after those who missed out. Perhaps the new Cmt could 'pop over the pond' and get briefed by those who know how to do things well.

[POBJOY]

Beagle The answer is NO, i would have thought a standard G site (poss with Cables) is sufficient, especially as it is the 'cable' element that is difficult to spot and not well understood by many GA folk. Surely LR was a Vig site before and cables not an issue. Many GA pilots are not familiar with any gliding operations, and do not realise that a glider on a winch launch has no ' forward'' vis (in the normal sense) and therefore it may just as well be marked for what it is and avoided, which is better than relying on an already overloaded Notam system. Of course this highlights the other issue of Zones and such like in that the charts get so cluttered with 'clutter' that there is little room to thread your way in the VFR world, and many more choke points to contend with. With so much use being made of 'Sky Demon' and other such devices the V of VFR seems to be a very mute point as I always thought it meant looking outside the cockpit, not relying on talking to someone on the radio to tell you. Myself I always keep a solvent cloth to hand to wipe the oil off the goggles.

[chevvron]

Now that Air Cadet gliding has started again at Little Rissington, some questions:

2FTS are seeking an ACP to establish an ATZ at Little Rissington, which would be active at weekends and on Public Holidays, other times by NOTAM. When the ATZ is not active nor is other NOTAM'd military activity taking place, would the site still be considered to be an active gliding site even though there was nobody there?

Can an ATZ really be justified?
Certainly needs an ATZ. I did a week as Course Admin Officer there back in 1991 for the first Vigi weekday course; the Cherokee from the Brize Aero Club kept flying though the circuit and disrupting operations, on one occasion appearing climbing from the Valley to the west of the airfield right in line with the runway in use just as a Vigi got airborne on the runway so we got no warning and were unable to warn the instructor in the Vigi.
Brize were aware we were operating (we used to phone them every morning to confirm) and also knew the radio frequency in use.(Then the BGA frequency 129.975; frequency nowadays is 120.775) and there was a NOTAM for the weekday gliding activity too.

[BEagle]

That was 30 years ago and before my time at the Brize Flying Club - I would hope that local airspace users are better informed these days....

There used to be exaggerated claims from the Vigilant operators of GA aircraft "...in our airspace". In truth few if any were closer than 2nm or 2000ft a.g.l. to Little Rissington.

Perhaps (as in one of the only 2 Airproxes in the last 3 years), some people simply haven't realised that Air Cadet gliding has made a welcome return after the Vigilant fiasco?

Better publicity is certainly needed - but an ATZ???

[chevvron]

That was 30 years ago and before my time at the Brize Flying Club - I would hope that local airspace users are better informed these days....

There used to be exaggerated claims from the Vigilant operators of GA aircraft "...in our airspace". In truth few if any were closer than 2nm or 2000ft a.g.l. to Little Rissington.

Perhaps (as in one of the only 2 Airproxes in the last 3 years), some people simply haven't realised that Air Cadet gliding has made a welcome return after the Vigilant fiasco?

Better publicity is certainly needed - but an ATZ???
Could be served by an annotation of the glider cable hazard height as with other gliding airfields but then in my experience, few GA pilots take notice of this; I used to warn countless aircraft every day about the cable hazard at Lasham and still people thought it was all right to fly over the airfield at 2500ft QNH. As Rissy is higher than Lasham amsl, the glider hazard will be higher too plus as it's a government airfield, surely it would be possible to notify an ATZ as 'Sat,Sun and PH HJ; OT by NOTAM' especially as there is a discrete frequency to call them on. As a precedent, Halton has an ATZ notified daily '0900 - 2000 or SS +15 (1 hour earlier in summer)'.
Simples?

[BEagle]

The G /2.8 annotation is now shown on the CAA 1:500 000 chart - for those who use it!

Why is anything else needed? Plenty of nearby gliding sites operate quite happily without any ATZ.

[Islandlad]

The G /2.8 annotation is now shown on the CAA 1:500 000 chart - for those who use it!

Why is anything else needed? Plenty of nearby gliding sites operate quite happily without any ATZ.
What would you suggest is a good avoid of an Air Cadet Gliding field? Vertical? Lateral? For all directions? 2000ft AGL? 2-2.5 miles? Clear of Cloud? What would cover that?

[BEagle]

The standard promulgation as for any other gliding site! Normally 2 nm radius up to the stated cable height limit - which in the case of Little Rissington is 2800ft amsl.

[chevvron]

The G /2.8 annotation is now shown on the CAA 1:500 000 chart - for those who use it!

Why is anything else needed? Plenty of nearby gliding sites operate quite happily without any ATZ.
Because there are some powered pilots who either don't seem to know what the cable hazard means or choose to ignore it.

[hoodie]

So on that basis you implicitly propose that EVERY cable launch gliding site in the UK should now have an ATZ around it.

That'll make the chart look quite something.

[POBJOY]

What would you suggest is a good avoid of an Air Cadet Gliding field? Vertical? Lateral? For all directions? 2000ft AGL? 2-2.5 miles? Clear of Cloud? What would cover that?

If only on the basis that winch cables are to all intent and purpose invisible, and a glider on launch has a more restricted forward view, then the 'safest' option is to avoid the area to the side.
Of course it may well be that 'other aviation non gliding activities' will happen at LR so that is why they wish to sanitise more space.
It becomes confusing when you have an ATZ but no ATC to notify of activity, and the notam system is not a reliable medium to cover this, as it is already overloaded with an excess of info.
The most important thing is the Cadets have a Gliding site again.

[chevvron]

Is there accomodation at Rissy for overnight stays? When I was there in '91, we stayed at South Cerney; helluva trek every day; at least I was able to arrange to collect evening meals from Brize (the VGS parent station) every day rather than close down, trek to Cerney, evening meal then back to Rissy and fly until dark.

[tmmorris]

No but there is going to be.

[Tingger]

You mean more accommodation. On top of the brand new (2017) accommodation block with integrated feeder, that matched the fully refurbished Sqn HQ and the brand new hangar? While other VGS carrynon with clapped out end of life leaking portcabins?

[Sky Sports]

Spotted on another forum;
it would be useful to let people know that the Dept for Transport publish, on a monthly basis, all grants/expenditure over £25k. In their Feb 2020 spreadsheet you will find a Grant to Aerobility to refurbish Vigilant gliders of £745,000.
What a pity that nobody associated with air cadet flying could have been bothered to bid for this grant!

Looking at that spreadsheet, it is interesting to note that they give Bristow Helicopters in the region of £16M each month for SAR provision. Can this be right?

[RAFEngO74to09]

Enjoyed being able to pass on the good news today, to the Officers Commanding VGS and AGS, that the AOC 22 Gp has given permission for the return of RAF air cadet gliding and aerospace training. Looking forward to welcoming our cadets back into 2 FTS over the coming months.

https://twitter.com/fts_2/status/1312506160830844928
---------------------------------------
Time to close the thread !

[muppetofthenorth]

Enjoyed being able to pass on the good news today, to the Officers Commanding VGS and AGS, that the AOC 22 Gp has given permission for the return of RAF air cadet gliding and aerospace training. Looking forward to welcoming our cadets back into 2 FTS over the coming months.
Time to close the thread !
Not so much, no...

The Air Cadets has still lost over 50% of flying availability, the Vikings are soon to be out of service with no talk of replacements, and the spread of VGS and AEF units is woeful.

[622]

How do they bypass the rule of 6 mularkey....is it the 'Training /Education get out'?

I would have thought trying to run a VGS with COVID restrictions is a minefield.....

[muppetofthenorth]

How do they bypass the rule of 6 mularkey....is it the 'Training /Education get out'?

I would have thought trying to run a VGS with COVID restrictions is a minefield.....
Youth groups / education has been deemed necessary.

However, that doesn't begin to cover actually getting kids to flying locations. Air Cadet volunteers have been pretty much banned from transporting anybody except themselves, so unless parents are willing to cart kids a few hours, drop them off, not be allowed on the station themselves, wait a few hours for no flying to take place because it looks a bit windy, then drive back again... This amounts to nothing but a PR exercise.

[Tingger]

Not much of a minefield,

Wash hands regularly
Wear a face covering when required
Maintain 1m+ SD

[622]

How do they handle things like parachute change overs.....do they sanitise between occupants?...all those dribbly cadets!,,,,

...and then there are the A/C themselves at crew changes.....and the vehicles.
When you look at the so called advice in the real world when you have had passengers in your car .....it’s practically a full valet!

[muppetofthenorth]

Not much of a minefield,

Wash hands regularly
Wear a face covering when required
Maintain 1m+ SD
Air cadet guidance - which has gone to them from the RAF - is for equipment to be quarantined for 72 hrs between uses.

[AnglianAV8R]

Not much of a minefield,

Wash hands regularly
Wear a face covering when required
Maintain 1m+ SD

and clap, don't forget to clap.

[Tingger]

Air cadet guidance - which has gone to them from the RAF - is for equipment to be quarantined for 72 hrs between uses.

There is no requirement in the RAFAC guidance to quarantine equipment for 72 hours, this only appears in relation to returned clothing.

622 - clean the aircraft in accordance with Engineers advice, minimise sharing of equipment so not everyone gets to put a cable on. Gliding clubs have been operating since May for solo and flying training organisations since July

[Tingger]

https://www.flyer.co.uk/aerobility-opens-order-book-on-grob-109-able/?utm_source=Newsletters+%26+Events&utm_campaign=b501088e1b-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_09_29_08_16_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_ec1978bcc6-b501088e1b-300381213

Get yourself a nice ex MOD airframe, only dropped once.

[Mushroom club]

Hmm...so these are the same aircraft that could not be returned to service with the Air Cadets?

[Big Pistons Forever]

My glider club is seeing an influx of young people who want to get their GPL because sadly it looks like all glider flying for the Canadian Air Cadets has been cancelled right through next summer. A whole cohort of young people will miss their chance to get their GPL's through the excellent free Air Cadet program due to COVID-19

Even if things start to get back to normal in 2022 the program will have lost its momentum and critical staff may have drifted away. As well every aspect of the Cadet experience has been diminished by draconian COVID protocols that are already resulting in young people leaving due to the lack of interesting and engaging activities on offer. Lack of flying may be the least of the problems for every nations Air Cadet program....

[Sky Sports]

Hmm...so these are the same aircraft that could not be returned to service with the Air Cadets?

Absolutely scandalous what has happened to these aircraft!

Wonder if the DfT would give a certain 'youth organisation' a grant to buy them back?

[Prangster]

My grandsons squadron is in danger of closure because of a lack of adult staff, a problem common throughout the corps and indeed nearly all other youth movements. As a correspondent for local newspaper I lost track of the times I reported on the closure of scout and guide troops for the same reason. Great to have some muted form of GVS activity but they may well find themselves whistling dixie the supply of cadet blood drains away. Cadet recruitment isn't an issue grandson has seen his unit double in size. Covid of course has strangled nearly all activity. He was lucky to have his first glider AEF a week before shutdown

[Consulman]

A very interesting picture of the revised Vigilant.
It is interesting to note that it is in the very configuration (Glass cockpit and Rotax engine) that we had put forward just before the grounding (I refuse to call it 'pause'!).
At that time funds had already been allocated for re-engineing and an effort was being made for the instruments to be upgraded for the Vigilant MkII.
As for the accommodation issue, all the remaining VGS sites are having/had accommodation built on-site. Little Rissington had a new block built a few years ago (on the site of the Control Tower, which is where I stayed when on the unit). This was for 637 VGS and now that 621 VGS has not been able to move to an airfield in its traditional area, it is having its own buildings.

[Arclite01]

Merryfield not happening now for 621VGS then ?

[POBJOY]

Amazing that the Air Cadet gliding operation has been thoroughly shafted by its own internal mismanagement, and effectively had its machines given to another organisation (plus a 750,000 golden hello), who are able to sell most of these machines to fund their own operation. Hardly a model of prudent public spending or the tech ability of the Air Cadets 'parent organisation', not to mention the appalling ongoing spend on equipment, and underutilised infrastructure. CV19 aside the organisation has been dealt a very poor deal by the very people who should have been leading it. Of course that was the problem NO ONE WAS LEADING IT who knew anything about what was needed, or even worse what they were loosing. Once they abandoned their USP of simple hands on flying the plot was lost, and all the twatter, facelessbook, celebs,and glossy brochures counted for nothing. It is a great shame that the organisation was not being led or organised by the same volunteer calibre that had its hands on gliding operation as a World Class flying training organisation available to thousands.

[Thud105]

Something else that has struck me as odd is the choice of this aircraft for a charity that specialises in flying the disabled. The G109 is not actually that easy to get in and out of, particularly when compared to a high-wing aircraft with a tricycle undercarriage and car-type doors, like a Cessna or Tecnam. Anyone else got an opinion?

[Arclite01]

I would agree that access is not that easy into Grob 109's for the less than able bodied. My concern is not about getting in, but getting out in an emergency (engine fire on the ground say ?)

Lets face it. They got the aircraft for free and refurbished them at Taxpayers expense (via a grant) through a dirty deal done in a smoke filled back room.

Disenfranchising 60,000 Air Cadets in 1 fell swoop while making themselves a nice little profit and getting themselves some free flying.

They'd have taken Be2c's on that basis..............

Arc

[air pig]

Amazing that the Air Cadet gliding operation has been thoroughly shafted by its own internal mismanagement, and effectively had its machines given to another organisation (plus a 750,000 golden hello), who are able to sell most of these machines to fund their own operation. Hardly a model of prudent public spending or the tech ability of the Air Cadets 'parent organisation', not to mention the appalling ongoing spend on equipment, and underutilised infrastructure. CV19 aside the organisation has been dealt a very poor deal by the very people who should have been leading it. Of course that was the problem NO ONE WAS LEADING IT who knew anything about what was needed, or even worse what they were loosing. Once they abandoned their USP of simple hands on flying the plot was lost, and all the twatter, facelessbook, celebs,and glossy brochures counted for nothing. It is a great shame that the organisation was not being led or organised by the same volunteer calibre that had its hands on gliding operation as a World Class flying training organisation available to thousands.

The problem is that the ACO has been led for the last ten years plus by admin sec branch officers not aviators or engineers. Then their is the flying ‘management’ within the organisation that has been poor at everything but empire building. Then add in the mendacity and outright moral corruption of some who could not lie straight in bed, you have a failing organisation.

[bobward]

The ACO has been closed for business since March, with little if any sign of re-starting. Bearing in mind that the average cadet spends between one and five years in the Corps,
how many will come back when they do eventually re-open?

Is the sale of the Grob's just the start of the whole shooting match being closed to pay for Covid? A tragedy if this is the end for what was once the finest youth organisation
in the country.

[Sky Sports]

Somebody posted the following shocking stats on another site. It gives the percentage of air cadets who have completed the different stages of gliding progression in the last 2 years.

Using the 1 April 2020 cadet statistics 3 (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/890955/MOD_Sponsored_Cadet_Forces_Statistics_April_2020.pdf) (41720 RAFAC Cadets), for 18/19:

FAM, (ground school only): 14.1%
Blue Wings, (first flight): 4.6%
Bronze Wings, (3 flights): 0.73%
Silver Wings, (solo): 0.23%
Gold Wings Part 1: 0.029%
Gold Wings Part 1&2: 0.0024%
VGS Staff Cadet G2: 0.026%
VGS Staff Cadet G1: 0.011%

Only 1 cadet out of 41,720 has reached the pinnacle of air cadet gliding by getting parts 1 & 2 of their gold wings!

[pr00ne]

bobward,

"....being closed to pay for Covid?"

WoW! Wasn't aware that the ACO had a mega trillion pound budget.

Get real.

[POBJOY]

Something else that has struck me as odd is the choice of this aircraft for a charity that specialises in flying the disabled. The G109 is not actually that easy to get in and out of, particularly when compared to a high-wing aircraft with a tricycle undercarriage and car-type doors, like a Cessna or Tecnam. Anyone else got an opinion?

It was quite obvious at the start of this 'disability' approach that the machine was not ideal for that purpose (other than they were going to get them for virtually nothing and sell most of them off). What the deal achieved was a 'washing of the hands' by the Ministry and amazingly no blame to anyone. What the RAF wanted to avoid was the machine 'popping up' in a civilian mode with little change to the spec, and flying again for the benefit of youngsters at little cost. Having completely screwed up their own operation, seeing them around the Country doing what they were supposed to do could not be tolerated, all as a major 'face saving operation'. As to 'HOW this was achieved, well you have to look at the 'People' involved from the organisations, and then decide if the Ministry dept, and the RAF made a cogent decision based on tech merit, and a sound operational case for disposal. I am not aware that a sound case for the outcome was ever made. Remember the LAA were willing to be the accountable tech input for possible future use, and as such the potential operation was secure. ARC sums it up well in his last post, and the Cadets have been the long term loser's. The lack of leadership from the top , plus poor input from 2FTS was not helpful, but has anyone actually learnt from this 'I think not'.

[bobward]

Pr00ne,
I think you missed my point. As a former VRT officer and squadron commander ,I'm well aware of what the Corps budget used to be. With all the services likely to be hammered to pay for Covid (as per earlier posts elsewhere), I'm just worried that MoD might see a quick win, unlikely to stir much ire within the ranks of PPruners.
"Every little helps.."

[POBJOY]

Pr00ne,
I think you missed my point. As a former VRT officer and squadron commander ,I'm well aware of what the Corps budget used to be. With all the services likely to be hammered to pay for Covid (as per earlier posts elsewhere), I'm just worried that MoD might see a quick win, unlikely to stir much ire within the ranks of PPruners.
"Every little helps.."
BobW One of the issues with the present day 'Cadets' is the ongoing cost of equipment contracts and the lack of utilisation. These costs continue to accrue even when equipment lies idle. When you have a 'leaderless' organisation with no commercial background it becomes vulnerable to even more extreme costs as seen by the whole Cadet Gliding Pause/Recovery operation that cost a fortune and produced nothing. Not content with that huge foul up they then compounded the situation with a joke of a disposal of machines that were demonstrably capable of further youth use at little user cost. It is not rocket science, just follow the 'MONEY' and then see who is getting it !!!. The 'golden' days of ATC 'Gliding training' were achieved with basic machines that gave decades of use, supported by 2nd life transport that managed to give another 'airfield' life, and a fleet of winches that also gave decades of use and did not fail. It is obvious that the system worked well and did so because it was kept simple. The record is not in dispute, no aviation training organisation in the World could take 'non streamed' youths and get them solo with such success. The 'Solo' aspect was not just about going on to fly more complicated types, it had the effect of bringing about self development and decision making that was quite unique,and was run by capable 'enthusiasts'.

[Mushroom club]

A friend had just sent me a copy of an article. Think it’s in Private Eye. Looks to me like a pretty accurate description of the fiasco regarding the Vigilants.

[DaveUnwin]

Really good to see the Eye is still tracking this scandal (think it covered it a few years back), which PPRuNe flagged up many years ago and I wrote about for Pilot magazine in 2015. I have to agree with the previous posts re ingress and egress too. I flew a G109A recently, and that wasn't the easiest machine to get in and out of, and its still a lot better than a B. I can think of lots of aircraft that would've been better than a 109 for Aerobility - for example the Tecnam specially adapted with hand controls that I tested at the factory several years ago........

[teeteringhead]

The Eye story is not available online (I subscribe) but seems to cover the main points.

What IS online is the "teaser" for the article, which I do reproduce:

BUNGS & BARGAINS
RAF aircraft grounded after it lost track of maintenance paperwork have been sold to a charity for a song – along with a £745,000 bung of taxpayers’ money.

It's the issue which is just out this week; has the picture of Cummings leaving No 10 on front cover.

[chevvron]

What proportion of £16Bn is £745.000? Could we buy them back now that MOD is going to get that much?

[Bigpants]

Chevvron yes the MOD could buy them back but what makes you think "lessons have been learned"? For decades the RAF safely and efficiently ran air cadet flying and then things changed for the worse. I look at the thread on MFTS above and just cringe for a service which a long time ago taught me to fly to very high standards. I suspect nothing has been learned in senior circles other than shifting the blame while getting promoted.

[Sky Sports]

On the downside the 'air' has very definitely been ripped out the air cadets and flogged on.

On the upside, you can now have a beard.

[chevvron]

On the downside the 'air' has very definitely been ripped out the air cadets and flogged on.


It was starting to happen years ago hence why Rob Walton, then OC 2409 (RAF Halton) Sqdn ATC started the microlight AEF project at Halton late '80s or early '90s (don't know exactly when; as it wasn't an 'official' Air Cadet activity I purposely kept away from it until I and other adult staff with PPLs were 'officially' invited to attend Halton on 26 May '91 to see what it was like) in which I participated and which eventually was developed to provide microlight Flying Scholarships. Sometime after this (possibly later in '91 or mid '92?) , AOC Air Cadets attended Halton to try out the AX3 for himself.
We flew weekdays only so as not to 'clash' with 613 VGS which was using Vigilants although we were permitted to fly from the parallel glider runways if we did want to operate at the same time; no problem with a microlight of course and eventually with HQAC funding, some 19 Air Cadet Microlight/PPL badges were awarded but unfortunately when this project ended so did the microlight operation due lack of funds.
It was of course, never intended that microlights should replace gliders, they were only initially intended to provide extra AEF, so when HQAC funded the Microlight Flying Scholarships using Chevvrons(!) in late '96, it was a bonus.

[POBJOY]

Really good to see the Eye is still tracking this scandal (think it covered it a few years back), which PPRuNe flagged up many years ago and I wrote about for Pilot magazine in 2015. I have to agree with the previous posts re ingress and egress too. I flew a G109A recently, and that wasn't the easiest machine to get in and out of, and its still a lot better than a B. I can think of lots of aircraft that would've been better than a 109 for Aerobility - for example the Tecnam specially adapted with hand controls that I tested at the factory several years ago........
There in no doubt that the Vig fleet going to this charity was not about getting a second life from the airframes and using most of them, but all about 'clearing the desk' of the machine for NON onward 'youth use' so as to avoid awkward questions. Anyone with a grain of a brain knows this to be the case, and remember no actual cogent 'use case' was made by the charity organisation as opposed to others who had a clear plan for all of the fleet to be flying again. This only highlights what happens when an organisation such as the Cadets gets 'infiltrated' by non aviation types at the top, and is further influenced by former regular RAF staff who have their own agenda re use of civilian volunteers. The Cadet organisation did not get broken by those running squadrons and local VGS flying ops, it got pulled apart from pension toppers who did not understand how the operation worked or where the centre of excellence was. It most certainly was not at HQAC or 2FTS.

[boswell bear]

This only highlights what happens when an organisation such as the Cadets gets 'infiltrated' by non aviation types at the top, and is further influenced by former regular RAF staff who have their own agenda re use of civilian volunteers. The Cadet organisation did not get broken by those running squadrons and local VGS flying ops, it got pulled apart from pension toppers who did not understand how the operation worked or where the centre of excellence was. It most certainly was not at HQAC or 2FTS.

Well said!

[POBJOY]

Just to be clear on this, I have no issues with the charity getting some free machines, but as they only wanted about half a dozen one has to ask why they were given the entire fleet !!.
The proposed 're-engineering' of the machine is a complete economical nonsense, and only highlights what a appalling decision the authorities made. Just look at what the Cadets got out of all this, :- NOTHING, and what did they loose,:- the effective break up of a World Class training organisation that had given over seven decades of hands on flying training by a very capable mainly civilian volunteer force. Lets be quite clear about this, it was a national disgrace, a complete shafting of a respected youth organisation, a cover up of the highest degree, and a financial deal that would not pass scrutiny outside of the military overlords. They only get away with it because in the great scheme of things the Government and Country at large now have rather more serious issues that have to be addressed.

[Chugalug2]

It is indeed a national disgrace, POBJOY, but the scandal is much much bigger than the loss of the ACO gliders! 'They' get away with it because the Establishment has banded together to ensure that the RAF VSO cover up holds. The ACO gliders were but the latest air fleet to suffer from the attack on the previously ring fenced Air Safety funds, which were diverted to compensate for massive losses sustained when new AMSO policies failed so spectacularly. The reason the Air Safety budgets were ring fenced is because once resources are withdrawn there is no way back. Airworthiness starts to haemorrhage in fleet after fleet until the swiss cheese holes all line up. They did so on the Mull in 1994 to Chinook ZD576 and in Afghanistan in 2006 to Nimrod XV230. These two fatal accidents alone killed all 43 occupants. Other airworthiness related air accidents have accounted for many other fatalities, including the Red's Sean Cunningham death in 2011. Mercifully there was no such accident in the ACO fleet, and remedial work has quickly restored airworthiness albeit to the civvy register and operator. Why couldn't that have been done whilst retaining them within the ACO? It could have been, but that would have raised questions of why they were unairworthy in the first place, which would have compromised the cover up and certain RAF VSO reputations.

The MOD will be quite relaxed about any grumbling staying within the Air Cadet Organisation. Their very first line of defence is to stove-pipe each accident, each example of unairworthiness. Indeed, airworthiness is rarely touched upon by BoI's/SI's, let alone the lack of it being identified. It took a bunch of civilians producing evidence to the respective Nimrod and Chinook Judicial Reviews to show that both the Chinook HC2 and Nimrod MR2 fleets were unairworthy at the time of their accidents. In reality it infects many other fleets and will go on doing so until Air Regulation and Accident Investigation is removed from the maw of the MOD and made truly independent of it and of each other.

Self Regulation Never Works and In Aviation It Kills!

[POBJOY]

I agree CHUG, but the actual VIG fleet disposal operation was the remit of DESA.
The DESA 'mission statement' is quite clear, and states that without compromising legal issues they are tasked with getting the MAX return on assets for the MOD, plus provide opportunity for British business as part of their prosperity agenda.
DESA manifestly failed to do this, and by doing so have been complicit in the overall cover up.
The public interest has not been served either in a financial or practical way, nor has the Air Cadet organisation been provided with a fit for purpose ongoing facility that it paid for and is still doing so.
The sad facts are that the very strengths of the Air Cadet gliding operation in its 'volunteer' civilian operational leadership, gave it little actual power to mitigate the appalling lack of leadership and Tech support from those who were supposed to be running the organisation at HQAC.
The requirements of DESA were quite obviously compromised in a similar fashion by those wishing for the full disgraceful episode to be hidden in a way that cost the tax payer even 'more' money, and true to form got nothing in return.

[Chugalug2]

And I in turn couldn't agree more with you, POBJOY. DESA is part of the MOD, just as the MAA is. Both are therefore compromised from the word go. What is more notable is the way that institutions and organisations outside the MOD; RAeS, HSE, various Police Forces, the Scottish Crown Office, and others, have chosen to ignore evidence of this gross scandal and actively field for the MOD. All this to cover up the reputations of a handful of ex RAF VSOs!

The cost has been enormous in blood and treasure and goes on doing so because Regulation and Accident Investigation remain compromised by the continuing cover up. If the excuse is that the good name of the Royal Air Force would suffer following complete revelation, I would merely counter that the real RAF exists behind the Station Gates, outside of which is merely a pyramid of bureaucracy. It is that bureaucracy that has so utterly failed those who serve behind those gates and which needs total reform just as urgently as the MOD itself.

[Martin the Martian]

Slightly off topic but worth mentioning, when -sometime next year- the various cadet organisations are permitted to hold parade evenings once more I do wonder how many cadets and adult staff will not return. I also wonder if that will force units to close and ultimately lead to a consolidation into one Joint Cadet Corps to save money.

[muppetofthenorth]

Slightly off topic but worth mentioning, when -sometime next year- the various cadet organisations are permitted to hold parade evenings once more I do wonder how many cadets and adult staff will not return. I also wonder if that will force units to close and ultimately lead to a consolidation into one Joint Cadet Corps to save money.
I know in my Wing (of approx 30 units) we're likely to lose ~10 squadrons through lack of staff alone.

[Sky Sports]

A straw poll in my wing has indicated a 40% loss of cadets and 30% loss of staff.
Yes, Covid has given staff and cadets time to take stock and an excuse, but it was only the straw that broke the camels back.
Staff are fed up of the red tape and mountains of paperwork.
Cadets are fed up with the lack of meaningful physical activities such as gliding, shooting, fieldcraft etc.

[bobward]

Sky,
I heartily agree with your comments. It's close to three years since I left after 40+ years as an instructor, along with close to seven years as a cadet. When the ATC scribblers discovered Risk Assessments and other forms of admin, that was the beginning of the end. Of course any organisation responsible for the safety and well being of children must operate safely. What happened was that the pendulum swung way too far the other way. Example: a risk assessment to cover a cadet making the tea(?) Taking cadets on training visits needed a health form for each cadet, and every staff member. These had to be kept for five years after each visit. A new set had to be produced for every visit. When I asked why the answer was that you couldn't rely on parents telling us if their child had developed anything since the last trip. Whole empires were built on this stuff, as Wings needed dedicated officers to police the units.

An old friend who is still in the Corps has told me that recently all their buildings have been inspected by those that manage them. Ominously, in his wing, all the locks on the buildings were changed....

Please don't dismiss this as the rants of a grumpy old ex-instructor. The ATC was for most of it's history the best youth organisation in the country, and possibly the world. Many of the cadets we had the privilege to work with. went on the do great things. Those that didn't still earned useful skills and that, given guidance and encouragement, they too could excel. What happens when COCID ends it's stranglehold on us i something I dread to think about.

[Sky Sports]

Given the underhand 'disposal' of the Vigilant fleet and the accusations in the recent Private Eye article, is there enough here to warrant a police investigation?

[pr00ne]

Sky Sports,

What law do you think has been broken and what criminal act carried out?

[air pig]

Sky Sports,

What law do you think has been broken and what criminal act carried out?
Misfeasance in public office for a starter.

[Sky Sports]

What law do you think has been broken and what criminal act carried out?

I have no idea, i would never be so presumptuous as to tell the police how to do their job!
However, given the accusations made on other forums/websites, the inference of a bung by the Private Eye, the finger pointing at Mr. Middleton, the FOI releases and the awkard questions in the House of Lords, it's about time this was properly looked at.

[tucumseh]

The danger is of conflating the two main issues - the reason for the grounding, and the act of disposal. The obvious common offence is the making of false record (fraud by misrepresentation).

The Police, CPS and HSE have all refused to take action - the HSE saying it has no authority in cases involving airworthiness. A quite specific exemption apparently, even if deaths have occurred; although after the Cunningham case (closely related to this through a shared Type Airworthiness Authority) one takes what they say with a pinch of salt.

But if someone has evidence of other offences relating to the disposal, then best of luck. And whoever persuaded Private Eye to run their piece, well done.

[pr00ne]

Misfeasance in public office for a starter.

air pig,

VERY difficult to prove that the accused had a duty of care to the plaintiff and acted deliberately in the knowledge that what they were doing was illegal.

[POBJOY]

Having experienced what the ATC could provide when it was subject to vision and capable leadership, I struggle to see what the future will hold even under the new 'RAF Cadets' banner, especially with the leaning towards Space and pilotless devices.
In fact one could say the organisation is even less likely to prosper under 'service bureaucracy' with its ever deceasing 'hands on element' due to the ever increasing interpretation of H&S with associate paperwork 'box ticking'.
The Gliding fiasco was probably the final straw in showing that the 'organisation' is actually incapable of organising itself, let alone backing up a capable team of volunteers.
The attempt to give the 'redundant' Vigilants another 'life' out of service control was very cost effective and deliverable, as indeed were the original actual Cadet Gliding schools and their volunteer staff. No cogent reason could be found to dismiss this proposal at DESA, and indeed as alluded it would have not have stopped another organisation having some machines for themselves. However this would NOT have suited the RAF themselves purely on the basis that it may have thrown doubt on why the Cadets were loosing this facility in the first place !!.
With the 'Carpet' already lifted by the RAF, and suitable commercial interests hovering with a broom the death blow was delivered under the DESA banner, but in reality by collusion and the RAF wishes. I might add that the Vig use plan was not dependent on any 'Golden hello grant' or indeed any public money being needed. It was a bold and honest plan to see some 'right' come out of the appalling Gliding fiasco, but in true 'Yes Minister' tradition was suitably flattened by the very people who had FAILED to do their public paid jobs.

[pr00ne]

POBJOY,

In what way can you justify your statement "..the very people who had FAILED to do their public paid jobs?"

In what way have they failed?

They took decisions that you didn't like.

[Sky Sports]

In what way have they failed?

You're obviously new to this thread and the sorry saga of how a whole fleet of aircraft, much enjoyed by thousands of kids, was taken from them with NO REPLACEMENT provided.

I know its 258 pages long, but please go back and start reading this thread from the start. If you can't be bothered, or don't have the time, just read the FOI's detailing how people basically sat around drinking tea and smoking fags while they should have been overseeing the airworthiness of the most basic of aircraft.

They took decisions that you didn't like.

And neither did anyone else. In fact, the only people who 'liked' the decision, were those handful who had an awful lot of arse covering to do!

[Engines]

Gents,

I wanted to hold back for a bit here, to see if anyone picked up on what I thought (happy for others to disagree) was the key aspect of the ATC Glider Scandal (and yes, I think it merits its own title). Happily, Sky Sports hits the nail square on the head.

In my view, this isn't primarily about RAF VSOs - although they played their part in setting the conditions. It isn't about criminal cases - although I could see how that might possibly be an angle. The core of this thing is a systemic failure by the RAF to properly procure and maintain an airworthy fleet of aircraft. My view is as follows. The failure started in a rushed procurement, which was compounded by a failure to properly set up the basic building blocks of airworthiness. This was followed by the issue of what must have been, even at the time, an insufficiently supported CA Release and RTS. It was topped off by an extended failure to properly maintain the aircraft, and a failure to maintain the required airworthiness record. The result was that the RAF, for some years, was flying civilian children in non-airworthy aircraft.

A number of people failed to do their jobs properly, at the working levels of all the organisations concerned. People 'did as they were told' and signed off type airworthiness documentation that they almost certainly knew was defective. People failed to carry out basic checks on the contracted maintenance activity. People read ageing aircraft audits and apparently failed to address serious issues. You can't have that many people dropping the ball without concluding that there has to be something awry with the system in which they were working. That's a systemic failure.

When they failed their initial CAMO audit by the MAA, the RAF (2 FTS) had absolutely no idea how bad the situation was. They issued a stream of updates and press releases to their staff (and the cadets) that bore no relation to the real world. Promise after promise evaporated as they failed again and again to execute their various 'recovery plans'. The RAF then went out and lied to the press about what had happened. Then they got Ministers to lie on their behalf. And right at the death, the RAF got the Government to bung a charity 750 grand to take the Vigilants off their hands, and get the issue under the carpet.

Why does this matter? Because it could be happening right now on your squadron, in your hangar, on your aircraft you just signed out. That's what 'systemic failure' means. Covering it up means that it's very probably not been addressed.

The RAF is chock full of excellent people. I worked with the RAF for years, and I always pay tribute to the excellence and professionalism of those I met along the way. But something was clearly really badly wrong here.

Best regards as ever to all those good people in the RAF working hard and professionally to do the right thing. They deserve our respect and gratitude for what they do.

Engines

[salad-dodger]

Gents,

I wanted to hold back for a bit here, to see if anyone picked up on what I thought (happy for others to disagree) was the key aspect of the ATC Glider Scandal (and yes, I think it merits its own title). Happily, Sky Sports hits the nail square on the head.

In my view, this isn't primarily about RAF VSOs - although they played their part in setting the conditions. It isn't about criminal cases - although I could see how that might possibly be an angle. The core of this thing is a systemic failure by the RAF to properly procure and maintain an airworthy fleet of aircraft. My view is as follows. The failure started in a rushed procurement, which was compounded by a failure to properly set up the basic building blocks of airworthiness. This was followed by the issue of what must have been, even at the time, an insufficiently supported CA Release and RTS. It was topped off by an extended failure to properly maintain the aircraft, and a failure to maintain the required airworthiness record. The result was that the RAF, for some years, was flying civilian children in non-airworthy aircraft.

A number of people failed to do their jobs properly, at the working levels of all the organisations concerned. People 'did as they were told' and signed off type airworthiness documentation that they almost certainly knew was defective. People failed to carry out basic checks on the contracted maintenance activity. People read ageing aircraft audits and apparently failed to address serious issues. You can't have that many people dropping the ball without concluding that there has to be something awry with the system in which they were working. That's a systemic failure.

When they failed their initial CAMO audit by the MAA, the RAF (2 FTS) had absolutely no idea how bad the situation was. They issued a stream of updates and press releases to their staff (and the cadets) that bore no relation to the real world. Promise after promise evaporated as they failed again and again to execute their various 'recovery plans'. The RAF then went out and lied to the press about what had happened. Then they got Ministers to lie on their behalf. And right at the death, the RAF got the Government to bung a charity 750 grand to take the Vigilants off their hands, and get the issue under the carpet.

Why does this matter? Because it could be happening right now on your squadron, in your hangar, on your aircraft you just signed out. That's what 'systemic failure' means. Covering it up means that it's very probably not been addressed.

The RAF is chock full of excellent people. I worked with the RAF for years, and I always pay tribute to the excellence and professionalism of those I met along the way. But something was clearly really badly wrong here.

Best regards as ever to all those good people in the RAF working hard and professionally to do the right thing. They deserve our respect and gratitude for what they do.

Engines
As ever, a fantastic post Engines. Thank you.

[Sky Sports]

When I did my military and civvy training, I was told, on both courses, that it was a criminal offence to falsify an aircraft document. And yet, here we have a group of people who did it for years and years and not one single prosecution either military or civil!

[tucumseh]

When I did my military and civvy training, I was told, on both courses, that it was a criminal offence to falsify an aircraft document. And yet, here we have a group of people who did it for years and years and not one single prosecution either military or civil!

Well said. And far worse are those who instruct subordinates to make the false declarations, and disappear back into the woodwork when the Inquests open.

[POBJOY]

POBJOY,

In what way can you justify your statement "..the very people who had FAILED to do their public paid jobs?"

In what way have they failed?

They took decisions that you didn't like.

You need to read the book not just the cover !!!
My POST stands in all its contents and the evidence is there to for all to see.
MY point is that this disgraceful display of incompetence and technical ineptitude was finally swept under a large carpet with the help* of DESA. DESA were not the makers of the situation but were used* themselves in the ensuing cover up.
I do not pretend to be 'right' all the time, but I do know what the TRUTH is, and indeed WAS the casualty in this sad episode.

[Chugalug2]

Engines :-
In my view, this isn't primarily about RAF VSOs - although they played their part in setting the conditions. It isn't about criminal cases - although I could see how that might possibly be an angle. The core of this thing is a systemic failure by the RAF to properly procure and maintain an airworthy fleet of aircraft. My view is as follows. The failure started in a rushed procurement, which was compounded by a failure to properly set up the basic building blocks of airworthiness. This was followed by the issue of what must have been, even at the time, an insufficiently supported CA Release and RTS. It was topped off by an extended failure to properly maintain the aircraft, and a failure to maintain the required airworthiness record. The result was that the RAF, for some years, was flying civilian children in non-airworthy aircraft.

It rather depends upon what you mean by 'primarily' and what 'it' is. If you mean what happened in the first place it very much was to do with RAF VSOs, who subverted the UK Air Safety System in the late 80s by diverting funds away from it (to shore up RAF VSO incompetence) and getting rid of trained experienced engineers to be replaced by pliable inexperienced non-engineers who would suborn the Regulations as ordered. Now that was a very long time ago, over thirty years for the main part, but the result has been like a canker in UK Military Aviation ever since (nb not just in the RAF!). If you mean by 'it' the scandal of the ACO gliders then we are playing the MOD's game. Stove-Piping! The canker keeps emerging in fleet after fleet, often in fatal air accidents, because the experience, knowledge, and skill sets are not there to detect, let alone cure, the lack of airworthiness. If the truth of what has happened is not openly confronted, no matter the individuals concerned, the Services, the Departments involved, then that old adversary of PO Prune, the Gremlin, will have the last word as it always does when left to run riot.

If you pulp the Regs, cut and cut again the Safety budgets, reorganise the system umpteen times so that a manufacturer's Safety Bulletin can never find its way to the appropriate office (even if it was not a contractual obligation in the first place), then you can scarcely be surprised if airworthiness goes to hell in a hand cart. And who is the 'you' in this case if not the VSOs? Was the guy that over torqued the drogue shackle bolt (that should never have been undone on the flight line in the first place) on the Red's seats primarily to blame, or the VSO that ordered that illegal RTI in the first place? Mull was blamed on the pilots, until a 14 year campaign run in this forum got that VSO finding overturned. The Nimrod Review named an SO and a junior VSO when others further up the food train were never mentioned at all. Mull still remains a known unknown despite unequivocal evidence that the Chinook Mk2's were grossly unairworthy, because having overturned that BoI another has never been convened. The unairworthiness of the Nimrod Mk2's were such as to have scrapped the upgraded MRA4s publicly on TV! Who oversaw all these doomed fleets if not VSOs? And while we are mentioning VSOs, yes the great bulk of them are/were RAF VSOs, but not entirely!

The scandal is not primarily (that word again!) about the ACO Gliders, but about UK Military Airworthiness (or rather the lack of it). That it blighted the ACO fleet, the most simple aircraft of all, is terrible. Along with many here, I benefited from the selfless dedicated volunteers that sent me solo as an air cadet. But the fleet was grounded because it was unairworthy. Whatever else has happened or not happened we should give thanks for that small mercy. It is unthinkable what the outcome would have been if the ACO fleet had suffered an airworthiness related fatal air accident along with all the others that pepper this forum.

So I must politely take issue with you Engines. It is primarily about RAF VSOs, and it is about potential criminality. Where I totally agree with you though is that it is also about systemic failure, not just within the RAF but primarily (again!) within the MOD.

[salad-dodger]

Chug, why? Why do you post these bloody diatribes. You know Jack **** on the subject aside from what you have read here on pprune - and that is very obvious from that you have posted over the years and continue to post.

Your diatribes just distract attention when people who can add something useful do just that. Engines is one who obviously really understands some of the issues. Tuc is another. But your posts, sorry, no. You just post the same utter ****e, again and again and again.

[tucumseh]

You just post the same utter ****e, again and again and again.

As I'm mentioned as someone who understands SOME of the issues, as far as I can see Chug's post is factually accurate. And given how long this has been going on, quite succinct.

So, too, Engines' post.

I know Engines has researched this case deeply. I take his word that the procurement of the gliders was originally flawed. But in what way?

One key phrase in Chug's post is 'stove-piping'. When procuring anything related to aircraft one does not set up an airworthiness system from scratch. One implements mandated regulations and procedures, and where deviation is allowed there are guidelines. What you do is tailor the system to suit, within boundaries.

We have seen many threads here on airworthiness related accidents, but they too are stove-piped. MoD wants us to think they are unrelated accidents - Nimrod XV230 can't be related to Hercules XV179, they're different aircraft. But what would have prevented both accidents is implementation of consecutive paragraphs on the same page of the mandated regs. The Boards of Inquiry didn't look for this linkage, and nor did anyone above them.

Similarly, the deaths of Red Arrows pilots Burgess and Cunningham, 14 years apart. Burgess isn't mentioned throughout the Cunningham case, but both were killed by a failure to conduct disturbed systems testing. That's not rocket science. Every apprentice has the concept hammered into him/her, and isn't allowed near an aircraft until examined and tested. But my use of 'failure' implies Burgess was the first. I'm probably wrong. But most definitely, on Cunninham it was a flat refusal in the face of certain knowledge of what caused Burgess' death. The warnings had been issued, and those who issued the instruction that prevented disturbed systems testing made a conscious decision to deny the maintainers the wherewithal to implement their training, resulting in an unserviceable seat being used. That was truly malevolent. It was gross negligence. Frankly, it was manslaughter.

Similarly, Chinooks ZA721 and ZD576, 7 years apart. Far too many recurring failures. And when the Director of Flight Safety pointed out, 5 years after ZA721, that they were still recurring, he was ignored. By the VSOs who later fought the MoD campaign against the ZD576 pilots. Linkages. What was their primary role? Ensure airworthiness. They failed. No, they refused, after being warned by the proper authority. They had a duty of care. They knew exactly what they did. Gross negligence. Manslaughter.

Cunningham was a recurrence, and so too the gliders. The same flat refusal to implement regulations. Very few actually say to you 'Don't implement the regs'; and those who do are usually non-engineers who have been permitted to self-delegate airworthiness approval. (See 2003 RN Sea King ASaC mid-air and 2 of the Board's 3 main contributory factors. The risks had been identified and contacts let to mitigate. He cancelled them, and ignored that the risks still had to be mitigated). Initially, these people are easy to deal with: 'Please state in writing what regs I must ignore, and what I use in their place'. But that only works once, as you'll immediately be 'encouraged' to find a job in a non-air systems part of MoD. Colleagues see what happens and.... Again, that is malevolent. But what most do is simply deny you resources and wherewithal, often through an anonymous committee or minor screening meeting. Their first target is always 'airworthiness' money, as it's an intangible. It doesn't generate a 'due-in' on their stock computer, so must be a waste of money. In the Cunningham case, a simple change of maintenance policy that ostensibly saved money, but at the expense of safety. Why did no-one step in and point out that maintainers would now have to sign for something they knew hadn't been proven serviceable? And what is even more malevolent is the cover-up, blaming the company for not providing information, when they've already provided it and the RAF has used it to produce 13 training films. People MUST have known the audit trail was being torn up, and this outright lie perpetuated in court. That's the same team and management chain responsible for gliders, and just another way of expessing the same problem that Engines describes.

[Hueymeister]

Anyone got a link to it? Cannot seem to find it through a search, here or on tinterweb.

[airsound]

Huey - Link to readable Private Eye article? As far as I know it's not available electronically. I do have a scan of the printed piece, but I think it's probably illegal to post it here.

You could go out and buy the magazine for £2! It's No 1535, 20 Nov - 3 Dec edition. Page 40.

airsound

[Hueymeister]

Huey - Link to readable Private Eye article? As far as I know it's not available electronically. I do have a scan of the printed piece, but I think it's probably illegal to post it here.

You could go out and buy the magazine for £2! It's No 1535, 20 Nov - 3 Dec edition. Page 40.

airsound

I’ll see if I can get access to a Canadian copy. I live in the frozen north!

[airsound]

Sorry about that, Huey - not about where you live, of course, which is entirely admirable - but because I rather doubt Private Eye is published in Canadia. But they do have an overseas subscription number which I can let you have if you want

airsound

[Sky Sports]

In what way have they failed?
From the FOI release 20170704 FOI12017 05825 DHAN100

ODH CAE Comments

The primary reason why glider airworthiness was questioned, leading to the 'pause', was a failure
of the operation, maintenance and assurance system.

CAE (DDH) Comments

The engineering risks are as follows:
• Adopting New Standards & Procedures - This will be the first time that the ac have been maintained and managed correctly for a number of years and, whilst MAOS accreditation has been achieved, there will be a heightened level of risk until the standards and procedures are fully embedded.


And there is plenty more gems like that in the other FOI's.

[Engines]

Sky,

Good post, and you're quite correct, there is plenty more to be found in the FOIs.

I'm posting again, because I want to to attempt to 'square the circle' with Tuc and Chug. I'd also urge all of us to treat all posts here in a polite way - but I'm not a moderator, so feel free to ignore this. I apologise sincerely if I've been the source of any angst - it certainly wasn't my intention.

I agree with Tuc and Chug that some senior RAF officers have, in the past, behaved very badly. I tend to assign their actions to incompetence, arrogance and ambition. I agree that at least some of them have been grossly negligent. I also agree that it has been in their interest to try to 'stove pipe' problems with airworthiness to obscure what they did. And I also agree that they should have been, and still should be, held to account. Their actions caused significant damage to the UK's ability to properly manage airworthiness. Honestly, I am not at all sure that any of their actions would, at this distance, rise to the level off proven criminal offences - I'd leave that to the lawyers, but I respect Tuc and Chug's opinions. I think I've also taken pains to address the 'stove piping' aspect by repeatedly pointing out that this issue is very probably not confined to the ATC glider fleet, and that it's systemic in nature, by which I mean it probably exists across the RAF system, and possibly other services as well.

Where we differ is, I suggest, how these problems might now be addressed. Tuc says (amongst other very good advice) 'just implement the existing regulations' and he's quite right. Chug takes aim at 'the MOD' and calls for an end to 'self-regulation'. I respect these opinions.

My approach has been to focus on the working level - what regs the organisations didn't implement, and why that might have been. Yes, the MOD (at that stage with many RAF officers in previously civilian held positions) did the procurement and should have assured that the 'Type Airworthiness' certification was supported by the required evidence. The 'Continuing Airworthiness Management' (a bit of MAA terminology I support) was firmly in the hands of the RAF. There were failures in both of these.

As an example, why did the RAF not properly monitor their servicing contract for the gliders? Tuc correctly points out that a very good DEFCON was basically ditched without replacement, along with a slew of other regulations. However, in my experience, a headquarters engineer somewhere, probably at SO2 or SO1 level, was the 'customer' for that contract. I was just such an engineer (Lt Cdr), and a big part of our station's second line engineering support was being placed out to contract. This was around 1991. So what did we do?

At that stage of my career, I certainly wasn't familiar with DEFCONs. But what I was familiar with was our Quality Assurance system for all air engineering activity on the Station, uniform or civilian. And that was why our QA Officer (a Lt) stepped forward and proposed how we would incorporate the contractors into that system. And so we did. We inspected their work, checked the qualifications of the guys they had brought on the air station, and blocked the clearances of a couple of their managers, because we felt they didn't have the right skill set. We didn't do this because a VSO told us what to do. We didn't tell any VSOs what we were doing. We didn't even look at DEFCONs. We were just doing bog standard, basic, day to day airworthiness management. We didn't need to look at any regs. So how did a long series of RAF engineering personnel fail to do something like that? Was it that they just didn't know what to do? I find that hard to believe - their training is second to none. Did they try to do their jobs and get told 'not to bother' by a VSO? Honestly, I can't see anyone below a Wg Cdr getting involved in what should have been a routine QA audit on a contractor. Honestly, I can't say.

I'll end with what I think needs to happen (the 'King for a day' scenario), and I'm sure that others will disagree. But anyway: I'd get a the SofS to task the DG Defence Safety Authority (a 3 star) to carry out an independent review of the ATC glider scandal. I'd tell him that while he can involve MAA personnel, his review team must be led by an expert from outside the MoD or the Government, and include reps from the other MoD Safety Organisations to bring a more independent outlook than I'd trust the MAA to do. I'd also tell the DG that his team has to follow the evidence wherever it leads, and if that leads on to other accidents and organisations, so be it.

I'm going to go 'silent and deep' for a while now - I've bored enough people for far too long. If any of you want to carry this on, feel free to PM me.

Best Regards as ever to the aircrew who get into the aircraft every day to do their job. You are never taken for granted, and your lives are precious to each and every professional engineer out there.

Engines

[tucumseh]

Sky,

At that stage of my career, I certainly wasn't familiar with DEFCONs. But what I was familiar with was our Quality Assurance system for all air engineering activity on the Station, uniform or civilian. And that was why our QA Officer (a Lt) stepped forward and proposed how we would incorporate the contractors into that system. And so we did. We inspected their work, checked the qualifications of the guys they had brought on the air station, and blocked the clearances of a couple of their managers, because we felt they didn't have the right skill set. We didn't do this because a VSO told us what to do. We didn't tell any VSOs what we were doing. We didn't even look at DEFCONs. We were just doing bog standard, basic, day to day airworthiness management. We didn't need to look at any regs. So how did a long series of RAF engineering personnel fail to do something like that? Was it that they just didn't know what to do? I find that hard to believe - their training is second to none. Did they try to do their jobs and get told 'not to bother' by a VSO? Honestly, I can't see anyone below a Wg Cdr getting involved in what should have been a routine QA audit on a contractor. Honestly, I can't say.

Engines

Engines won't mind me saying this, but I first met him in 1985. I am fully aware of the problems YL were experiencing at the time, as I was the HQ 'Customer' he mentions, on FAA avionics - radar/sonics at the time, and a year later comms, nav and EW. The basic requirement was for one to have had a logical and planned progression through (at the time) five grades, with appropriate training at each grade, for the next grade. That is, useful from day 1. My very first task in post was to write the Admiralty Board Submisson for the first Sea King AEW Mk2 upgrade, and staff it through approval. My mentors (and tormentors) were an old and bold Sunderland pilot, and the Cdr RN eng who slept on a cot for months managing the AEW job in 1982 24/7. Both superb. The main thing they taught me was, you can ALWAYS tell someone's background by what they omit from a requirement.

I fully agree with what Engines says. The actions YL took were, in our HQ and in MoD(PE), mandated policy in all avionics contracts - and theoretically remain so. His actions would not have raised eyebrows. Just common sense, although that is a rarity! Especially, the right to vet company employees. Moreover, the regs required that they be an MoD appointment. We couldn't fire them, but we could (and did) rescind their appointments and withdrew their financial delegation if they weren't up to the job. (MoD will have kittens reading that. Delegating financial approval to a named individual at a contractor? Yes, it was how you managed to kick off safety investigations within minutes of notification. No contract amendment required. Ask SERCO, or Grob, of whoever, what such authority would have meant on gliders. Even if told by some idiot in MoD not to keep an audit trail, they'd be able to ignore them and be guaranteed payment). However, the Def Stan and DEFCON(s) alluded to have indeed been cancelled without replacement. The MAA's attempt to write something suitable in the new regs gets the basic definition wrong, and wanders off at a tangent. But, while cancelled, it is notable that MoD's flagship Infantry programme is still entirely based on the Def Stan, which must tell the MAA something.

Finally, the proposal to have an inquiry is sound. No doubt it would be resisted in the way the Nimrod and Mull Reviews were, but that could be overcome again. It needn't be long. List the recommendations from those reviews, underline those that are mandated policy (over 95%) and say, get on with it, or I'll employ someone who will.

Well said Engines. Feet up.

[airsound]

Engines, dear thing - you are a star. Please don't go absolutely 'silent' - or too 'deep'.

airsound

[Chugalug2]

I second Airsound in his plea for you to stick around please, Engines. We all want the same thing I'm sure, a return of Airworthiness to the UK Military Airfleets, and proper Air Regulation and Air Accident Investigation. How to get there is of course the tricky part. You and tucumseh have the advantage over most, if not all here. You've both been there and done it. Hence you are both respected and listened to avidly when you describe your experiences, analyse what has gone wrong, and suggest where we should go from here. I have to be up front here, I just don't trust the MOD to want to reform Air Safety. I know that is a terrible stance to take, but I look at what they have done and indeed not done to date. Mull is an indictment of the MOD. It pressed a knowingly unairworthy type into RAF service even as BD was still assessing it (and stopped doing so because it was 'positively dangerous'. When the inevitable accident happened it took 29 lives. The reaction was to brief against the pilots, fix the BoI by ensuring the withholding of evidence and witnesses, and find the dead pilots Grossly Negligent, all the time knowing the aircraft to have been Grossly Unairworthy. Finally when the SoS 14 years later put the finding aside it was never acknowledged by the MOD and the Reviewing Officers Finding is still clung to.

Now everywhere that I mention the MOD in the main I must admit I am talking about the actions and attitudes of RAF VSOs who have a stranglehold on the management of much of UK Military Aviation. I admire the way that the RN/FAA managed to avoid the worst aspects of that management simply by not being the RAF! RAF Engineers though had no such leeway. They were/are in the direct CoC that goes all the way to the top of their Service within the MOD. I don't pretend to comprehend how that pans out in real life, but take the Reds Mk10 seats for an example. The servicing bay is removed by the beancounters, an RTI is issued requiring the drogue shackle to be uncoupled to inspect for seat beam cracks every 50 hours. To conform to the RTI is to defy the seat servicing instructions. No RN headcover here, defy the CoC or the servicing instructions. What to do? Obviously don't carry out the RTI. Result? No coffee or tea interviews wearing out ever more illustrious carpets. I'm not trying to defend RAF EngO's here, just indicating the constant pressure on them to defy the Regs and simply get on with it. The result of that? A man dies!

You suggest going direct to the SoS. Numerous SoS's confirmed that disobeying an illegal order was an offence in itself! The MOD is not to be trusted in any way. Nothing that is in its orbit is independent. Even independent judicial reviews are minded to say that at the height of subversion of Air Safety it was a 'Golden Period' for goodness sake! All the goodwill in the world will not change this leopard's spots. Whatever reform of UK Military Air Regulation and Air Accident Investigation is to happen has to be outside and independent of the MOD and of each other. How we get there of course is difficult I have to admit, but get there we must in my view if the avoidable accidents and needless deaths are to cease (to the best of our abilities of course).

We all feel strongly about all this, professionally and as caring individuals. That is only natural. We all have varying ideas as to what should be done. Somehow we must come to a consensus and offer a united front to those who simply want to maintain the cover up and hope for the best. Aviation doesn't work like that as we all know. So jaw jaw, not war war!

Like you I am not a mod, and can only endorse your wise words, Engines. Let's all place nice!

[Rigga]

Chug said: “I just don't trust the MOD to want to reform Air Safety.“

Shortly before the Nimrod Review was announced (2010?) I was hired by BAES to help introduce Mil Part M into a fleet in their contracts. DEFSTANS (05-130?) were already published (although very poorly edited) and the bones of organisations were already there as I arrived at my post.
There were a few glaring operating errors, naive regulatory assumptions and some BAES management issues to clear out but all were quite simply corrected even though it meant relocating and re-allocating some staff. The uptake of the DEFSTANS by the brand new MAA was initially really welcome...and then the decline started to happen...
Slowly, Almost one phrase at a time and then a chapter here and there, the regulations started changing back toward the old AP101 (or whatever it was)...and eventually the DEFSTANS were withdrawn replaced with whatever it is now. First I started slapping desks and then placing my head gently on the steering wheel as I left work...
Then, luckily, I was headhunted and left the place to the MAA/RAF’s leisure. Still masters of their own destiny.

[Sky Sports]

Apparently 2 FTS have pushed out a survey asking cadets and staff members for their views and experiences of air cadet flying activities.

Questions include, how can we get more cadets flying? How can we make it more diverse? 🤔

[chevvron]

Apparently 2 FTS have pushed out a survey asking cadets and staff members for their views and experiences of air cadet flying activities.

Questions include, how can we get more cadets flying? How can we make it more diverse? 🤔
Back in the early '90s, some of us decided there wasn't enough 'Air' in Air Training Corps' which is why we started the Microlight project at RAF Halton, intitally for AEF with Rotax powered Cyclone AX3 aircraft, (although they pemitted cadets to be flown for AEF with certain conditions, HQAC took a dislike to Rotax engines even though the AOC himself tried one and was full of praise) then when we switched to Chevvrons which had Konig engines, HQAC funded Microlight Flying Scholarships.

[Arclite01]

Konig engines - that well known manufacturer :hmm:

Arc

[treadigraph]

Not seen any mention that 615 at Kenley are active again but, unless I'm very much mistaken, one of their Vikings has just launched and completed a quick circuit... Surrey Hills don't normally fly at weekends and it was silhouetted against the sky but I'd say it was a Viking. There is another one just launched and thermaling...

Seven years.

[Beancountercymru]

https://twitter.com/615vgs/status/1398718934325542912?s=20

[chevvron]

Glad to see the area south east of London will soon have a glidiing school sorry Squadron again but what about west and north west of London; 618 Odiham, 612 Abingdon, 613 Halton, 616 Henlow all gone leaving a massive gap.
Anyone know where my 'old' squadrons in south Bucks, 2204 Chesham and 1811 Marlow, go for AEG nowadays?

[Arclite01]

Wethersfield ? or Little Ris ?

Arc

[chevvron]

Hm about 3 hours travelling each way for maybe one 10 minute flight each, is that feasible? Kenley would be easier than either of those.

[Opsbeatch]

Wethersfield ? or Little Ris ?

Arc
Wethersfield is no more, the VGS number has moved to Swanton...non of the staff though thanks to the cream at the top!

There's a large hole in one of the most populated areas in the UK, all because 'he' didn't want his pride dented but that discussion has been done several times so it's like preaching to the choir :)

OB

[Arclite01]

Sadly I think, the issue with Kenley is that it is really a small site and only a 'one line' school (squadron). Currently it serves Kent Wing, Surrey & Sussex Wings, London Wing, Hampshire et al (plus CCF units) - way too many for a single unit of that size.

I think that giving them an even bigger catchment won't help anyone.

The logical thing is to re-open either Halton (until it closes), Abingdon, WOTG or Odiham as a one line school to plug the gap., There are spare airframes and winches..............

Arc

[muppetofthenorth]

There are spare airframes and winches..

But are there spare volunteers...? The air cadets has lost, charitably, a third of cadets in the last year and probably slightly more staff. It doesn't have the volunteers to run squadrons, never mind the gliders.

[skua]

CAS gave a state of the nation talk for the Royal Aeronautical Soc last night. Included: a net zero Air Force - tick; swarming drones - tick; space command - tick, tick; getting quickly to 40% of recruits being female - tick; more % from ethnic communities and disadvantaged backgrounds - tick.

But on reinvigorating the Air Cadet movement (which did a very good job of bringing in youths from both sexes, and all social backgrounds) - not a word.

[Training Risky]

CAS gave a state of the nation talk for the Royal Aeronautical Soc last night. Included: a net zero Air Force - tick; swarming drones - tick; space command - tick, tick; getting quickly to 40% of recruits being female - tick; more % from ethnic communities and disadvantaged backgrounds - tick.

But on reinvigorating the Air Cadet movement (which did a very good job of bringing in youths from both sexes, and all social backgrounds) - not a word.
Net Zero carbon emissions? For an air force which uses millions of gallons of fuel a year?

How???

By planting trees and using e-bikes?

[Haraka]

skua
Ye Gods!
Perhaps you might like to offer this up to the " Diversity Chiet Appointment" thread on this site for comment ?

[skua]

Haraka

Wilco.

[bobward]

Sadly the ACO has become very risk averse, mirroring society. The change started when Commandant ACO was no longer aircrew. This, coupled with the explosion in e-mail traffic down the line to squadrons, tied us up in knots, meaning the real aims and objectives became lost. Covid has also decimated the whole organisation. Very sad for all concerned.
How long before some civil servant decides to do a cost/benefit study, to see what the RAF / Military gets back for whatever the current outlay is?

As always, my deepest respect to those who have stayed with it through the last period of chaos.

[Doobry Firkin]

My Squadron had it's first night back this year last night, we did have one night back in December before shutdown 2. So we had jumped through all the hoops to get the place open last November / December loads of Squadrons haven't got to the point of being able to open up yet.
Due to the restrictions in Scotland laid down by the overlords in the Scottish Government and Youth-link Scotland we can't have everyone in on the same the night. We can have up to 30 in but they have to be 2m apart and the size of the building limits the numbers we can have in. So the Cadets are split over 2 parade nights and without doing any recruiting we have 10 new Cadets starting tonight, we have so many we are having to give them their own night..

Staffing is the issue - we lost one to Cranwell for IOT and when they left their partner did as well but there have been rumors of a recruitment drive for staff. We ask the parents but for many it seems like a couple of nights of freedom a week for them.

Hopefully we'll get some gliding soon, I can't see there being any camps until next year at the earliest so the Cadets need something to look forward to and keep them engaged this year!
Having said that our gliding is over 2 hrs away and with only 2 staff getting Cadets down to the central belt could be an issue for us at the minute.

[muppetofthenorth]

How long before some civil servant decides to do a cost/benefit study, to see what the RAF / Military gets back for whatever the current outlay is?

Fortunately, someone got there ahead of the civil service; https://www.gov.uk/government/news/independent-report-celebrates-positive-impact-of-cadet-forces

[Pegasus107]

Sadly the ACO has become very risk averse, mirroring society.

The ACO became RAFAC in October 2017 🙄

[POBJOY]

Kenley is rather on the small size for its catchment area and especially as normal ops are w-ends only (plus some week courses)
Well possibly an answer is to run lots of week courses utilising other closed Squadrons that have lost a base. In essence it would replace the old system at the original No1 and No2 Gliding centres but with a different staff make up.
The private world would call in 'maximising potential' and with so many keen people (and equipment) still around I think it could be staffed without difficulty as there are good transport links for the area.
I do not see the Cadet movement ever getting Motor Gliders back so in reality the gliding world will have to work with what is available, and at least Kenley is secure, and of course has a very proud history to give it a very special 'usp' for anyone flying from there. Surrey Hills Club would have to adapt, but they only exist because of the Air Cadets having the site so no doubt an 'accommodation' could be made.
Not as good as more sites, but Kenley has the catchment and thats never going to change. You know it make sense just get on with it.

Treads do the picture thing (18th Aug)

[muppetofthenorth]

Well possibly an answer is to run lots of week courses utilising other closed Squadrons that have lost a base.
Problem is schools (and increasingly parents) are extremely reluctant to allow kids to have time off during the week. Once they get to yr10 it's almost a guaranteed no as exams take precedence.

[POBJOY]

One could easily argue that the gains from the amazing experience of solo flight with associated decision making are indeed an aid for youth at an important part of their life, and have definite long term benefits in the education system because it enhances the ability to achieve, is classless, and unique in the way it brings out the best in those who experience the chance it offers.
When you add the amazing historical location that is Kenley then it is only a Win Win situation. Kenley the spiritual home of 11 group which held the line when it really mattered.
I did say it needed out of box thinking !!!

[Doobry Firkin]

Problem is schools (and increasingly parents) are extremely reluctant to allow kids to have time off during the week. Once they get to yr10 it's almost a guaranteed no as exams take precedence.
We've not had a problem with that - Pre-COVID. We still need to see if they're still flexible going forward.
The school gats a letter from the Sqn saying it's educational as they're learning.
I don't think we've had a Cadet have an application for a day off school for flying turned down.

[Auster Fan]

Ona slightly different topic, the first Senior Volunteer Adviser has been appointed (and first volunteer Group Captain - excluding Honorary Group Captains): Group Captain Andy Pass who also was awarded the MBE in the Queen's Birthday Honours List this year. About to relinquish command (if he hasn't already) of South and East Midlands Wing, so it will be interesting to see (as a former RAFVR(T) Officer myself) what difference it will make in future...https://twitter.com/aircadets/status/1405144472783048706

[bobward]

Pegasus,
Sorry for the late reply.

I'd heard the ACO became RAFAC in late 2017. Maybe that was part of the reason, after 42 years as in instructor, I left......

[Asturias56]

"One could easily argue that the gains from the amazing experience of solo flight with associated decision making are indeed an aid for youth at an important part of their life"

One could and should but it doesn't cut much ice with head teachers who are measured on the schools exam results - just like the idiot restrictions on taking a short holiday in term time

[621andy]

This is soo depressing...:{

I'm glad I went through the system when I did.

[Sky Sports]

No sooner than the air cadets were allowed back in the air with the AEF's, all flying has been paused again due to another tech issue with the Tutor.

Anyone know what the latest issue is, and how long its likely to take to fix it?

[Lordflasheart]

...
Can't help with the Tutor, but one is tempted to suggest it might have something to do with Ben Wallace's cunning plan to hold VSOs accountable for their defence management shortcomings -

The perceived danger in Whitehall would be "It might catch on, so we'd better ground everything that might get us into trouble ... until we can get him replaced ..."

Times, Nov 26, by Larisa Brown - ......... Officers to 'carry the can' for Ajax tank fiasco

More than 300 people have been exposed to noise and vibration problems from the Ajax light tank programme.

A former High Court judge could be appointed to find out why the army did not act on warnings that soldiers were becoming deaf after working on the Ajax light tank programme.

Ben Wallace, the defence secretary, said that people should “carry the can for some of their decisions” in a sign that officers could be sacked if they are found to have misled or covered up problems with the vehicle.

It is understood that one option being considered by Wallace is for a judge-led inquiry which would compel soldiers to give evidence about what they knew and when amid concerns that the army was dishonest about problems with Ajax prior to the integrated review of defence, so that the programme was not axed by the defence secretary.

It is extremely rare for senior officers and soldiers to be held to account for poor decision-making, with sources inside the army claiming that many of those who underperform are simply moved to other jobs.

A scathing health and safety report into Ajax is expected to be published in the first week of next month.

Why stop at Ajax ?

LFH

[SYO 01]

Who said cadets were allowed back in the air? None have flown since Mar 20.

[tmmorris]

You’re quite a long way behind: there was a rudder attachment failure and all the Tutors are being inspected and (as required) fixed. They are trickling back in; UAS flying has restarted; cadets in the New Year. Reduced capacity due to COVID precautions. (Think shared helmets.)

[Sky Sports]

Who said cadets were allowed back in the air? None have flown since Mar 20.
You’re quite a long way behind: there was a rudder attachment failure and all the Tutors are being inspected and (as required) fixed. They are trickling back in; UAS flying has restarted; cadets in the New Year. Reduced capacity due to COVID precautions. (Think shared helmets.)

I've known about the rudder bracket for a while now and know that they had been back in the air for a few months, (regularly seen in the locality of Wittering).
I'm also aware that 2FTS were cleared to fly cadets again at the start of November, and some units, such as 7 AEF at Cranwell had restarted the flying program pretty much straight away.
I'm also aware that cadets who were scheduled to fly between now and Christmas have been told their slots are now cancelled due to a tech issue with the aircraft. Hence my question!

[tmmorris]

There’s a restriction on aerobatics due to things being found in the oil that shouldn’t have been, but that hasn’t grounded them again.

[chevvron]

Anyone got an update on which VGS are operating now and which are 'working up'

[treadigraph]

615 at Kenley has been flying for some months now - can't recall when they restarted, probably June or July.

[ORAC]

https://twitter.com/andynetherwood/status/1489305445370056704?s=21

[POBJOY]

615 at Kenley has been flying for some months now - can't recall when they restarted, probably June or July.

Upholding a fine tradition of 'surviving & providing' just like its historic base. (Image Treads) PC
Just for the record Pobjoy was a very early 'volunteer' for Gliding AEF before it became part of the 'Gliding schools' program in addition to training.
Having only just got my uniform I happened to be one of the few Cadets left at our (450 Squadron ATC HQ Kenley) after the squadron bussed off to White Waltham for Chipmunk flying one Sunday. We were supposed to be cleaning the HQ, but a landrover arrived from 615 and asked for some Cadets to go over for a 'trial' AE flight.
We promptly ditched our 'bumpers and brooms' and went Gliding, and in my case I just kept going back to help out.
The joke was the Chipmunk brigade did not fly (weather) and we got 2 or 3 three launches each in a MK3. Bit of a row when the Squadron officers found out, but we had participated in some of the first programmed Gliding AE, and it started me off in an amazing adventure of actually flying AE Cadets myself whilst still a Cadet !!!!
615 & Kenley, unbeatable combination. (the MK 3's replaced the Hurricanes), and we called them the fretwork fighters.

[Sky Sports]

Apparently, AOC 22 Gp and HQAC have removed the responsibility for teaching ground school and the flight simulators from 2 FTS and the VGS.

It took some time, but it was finally seen as a terrible waste of time to have cadets at a VGS, but for them to spend a whole morning in a classroom. Hence why gliding numbers have remained painfully low since the end of the pause.
As a knock-on from these low numbers, the lack of slots at VGS meant only a small number of cadets were getting the ground school and this was an unnecessary blocker to cadets getting wings for their flight at an AEF, (of which there were hundreds).

The ground school and flight simulator sortie will now be taught within squadrons, where it should always have been.

[treadigraph]

Upholding a fine tradition of 'surviving & providing' just like its historic base. (Image Treads) PC

Here ya go Pobjoy!

Wait... can't find it. Try when I get back home...

[POBJOY]

Here ya go Pobjoy!

Wait... can't find it. Try when I get back home...

When it comes it should be Flagged Up as Kenley (Survivor) 615 (Still going strong) With some help from 111 Squadron which survived until 2011

[treadigraph]

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1163/kenley_8e57e47fe1faddf4bb07ba7d5a7cc23896a7e9bd.jpg
Kenley (Survivor) 615 (Still going strong) With some help from 111 Squadron which survived until 2011

[Krystal n chips]

A link to this came up on my FB page.

It appears the Grobs are getting a new lease of life, for a worthwhile cause. My apologies if this has already been posted about on here.

It's a shame all the locations are in the South and therefore beyond any realistic participation for me. That said, whom they are seeking in terms of experience, and what they offer, is quite specific which is understandable. It would be interesting to see who is doing the certification and under what auspice however.

Project Able (g109able.org) (https://www.g109able.org/)

[ASRAAMTOO]

There was an article about it in one of the flying magazines a while ago. I must admit it gave me very mixed feelings.

I was delighted to see that the aircraft are in fact "recoverable" and that they will be used in an excellent cause. Aerobility is a great organisation. I do have a few doubts about how robust they will be in their new role though.

This delight though was probably overcome by sadness and anger that the air cadet gliding organisation was decimated because apparently these aircraft were "not recoverable". I find it amazing that a charity (with a large grant from the government to help them) is able to acomplish this whilst all the resources of the MOD/RAF/ATC were not.

Perhaps we should nominate Mike Miller-Smith to be the next Chief of the Air Staff. (He could be deputy as apparently there is now a vacancy!)

[POBJOY]

Grob disposal, just another scandal to finish off the original scandal. The Cadets machines were in practice 'given away' on the basis that some can be sold to fund a very expensive 'upgrade' for (what benefit) !!!!
Easy to see who did well out of it (follow the money)
Of course the Cadets are the 'lost cause' together with the destruction of a fine training organisation that was the best value ever for a basic introduction to hands on flying.
This is what happens when you have complete clots in charge of a public purse, its not their money or business, and contractors run circles around a system staffed by complete non tech office staff. SCANDAL SCANDAL SCANDAL, and a sad end to the best ab initio TRAINING FACILITY in the world (END OF). Yes that is what is was, a VOLUNTEER TRAINING FACILITY for youngsters that delivered the goods, did it well, and was let down by the 'full time paid staff' that had absolutely no idea what they destroyed.

[[email protected]]

Perhaps AOC 22 Gp would like to establish an AEF at Chivenor to replace the VGS that was sadly shut down as part of the Grob fiasco.

Chivenor has lots of hangarage, no airspace issues (class G for miles in every direction) and a chuffing great runway the RM only use for vehicles - and there would be no shortage of volunteers to fly there either.

[POBJOY]

There was an article about it in one of the flying magazines a while ago. I must admit it gave me very mixed feelings.

I was delighted to see that the aircraft are in fact "recoverable" and that they will be used in an excellent cause. Aerobility is a great organisation. I do have a few doubts about how robust they will be in their new role though.

This delight though was probably overcome by sadness and anger that the air cadet gliding organisation was decimated because apparently these aircraft were "not recoverable". I find it amazing that a charity (with a large grant from the government to help them) is able to acomplish this whilst all the resources of the MOD/RAF/ATC were not.

Perhaps we should nominate Mike Miller-Smith to be the next Chief of the Air Staff. (He could be deputy as apparently there is now a vacancy!)

Q How do you cover up a scandal of immense proportions.

Answer, Issue false information out into the public domain, and then 'proclaim' a fantastic solution has been found to a problem (that did not exist ) by spending even more public money that
A :- Does not actually remedy anything other than reputation, B :- Destroys a huge economical 'volunteer' facility for all youth, C :- 'Gives' a public asset away and spends even more money for a business opportunity to third parties with no advantage to the National youth organisation that had its capability destroyed.

Are we surprised at the outcome, of course not, why would a Government organisation that could not even keep a fleet of Gliders serviceable be capable of delivering a fit for purpose solution to complete internal incompetence.

[pr00ne]

Perhaps AOC 22 Gp would like to establish an AEF at Chivenor to replace the VGS that was sadly shut down as part of the Grob fiasco.

Chivenor has lots of hangarage, no airspace issues (class G for miles in every direction) and a chuffing great runway the RM only use for vehicles - and there would be no shortage of volunteers to fly there either.

I think you'll find that that hangarage, along with the associated dispersals, has been rather heavily repurposed by the two resident Regiments!

By the way, whatever happened to the additional AEF that was announced as being stood up when the original downsizing and rationalising was announced?

[chevvron]

Perhaps AOC 22 Gp would like to establish an AEF at Chivenor to replace the VGS that was sadly shut down as part of the Grob fiasco.

Chivenor has lots of hangarage, no airspace issues (class G for miles in every direction) and a chuffing great runway the RM only use for vehicles - and there would be no shortage of volunteers to fly there either.
Halton is still operating and is used mostly at weekends and wednesday afternoons for gliding plus light aircraft.

[pr00ne]

Halton is still operating and is used mostly at weekends and wednesday afternoons for gliding plus light aircraft.

But Halton is closing in 2025.

[air pig]

But Halton is closing in 2025.


That maybe plan today but after the present situation, will it?

[[email protected]]

I think you'll find that that hangarage, along with the associated dispersals, has been rather heavily repurposed by the two resident Regiments!
Not the VGS stuff. The lovely new hangars that were built the last time Chivenor was reopened have been taken over by the logistics Regt as has the 22 Sqn Hangar and dispersal.

The important vehicles are all in a purpose built environmentally controlled building.

There is plenty of space for an AEF.

[POBJOY]

Whilst I would agree that Chiv 'was' / could be an ideal VGS site it is a remote location that under current circumstances would be difficult to both staff and attract suitable Cadet numbers.
The same situation as Predannack that is a perfect location for 'use' but even more remote than Chiv.
The 'customer' situation for any VGS has been made worse by Covid, and the lack of adult staff across many organisations. It may be that they will have to offer their 'air element' to other youth organisations that would benefit from the use of 'public equipment'.
I have always thought that Gliding is an excellent way for youth to 'develop' and the unique way it can unlock both confidence and decision making at a time when many are tied to screens and box ticking is still as valid today as it ever was. Perhaps it is time for someone to look outside the box and make the VGS facility a truly national youth facility, therefore getting maximum use from equipment and locations which it plainly does not achieve at present.

[pr00ne]

Not the VGS stuff. The lovely new hangars that were built the last time Chivenor was reopened have been taken over by the logistics Regt as has the 22 Sqn Hangar and dispersal.

The important vehicles are all in a purpose built environmentally controlled building.

There is plenty of space for an AEF.

Whilst agreeing that there most probably IS space for an AEF, I think you'll find that those "lovely new hangars" were in fact the very same hangars that were built there in 1940, and the very same ones that I saw and experienced when I was there with 229 OCU. New cladding and offices were added in the rebuild. The 229 OCU that I experienced was tin shacks and wooden huts. The rebuild produced a wonderful station.

Is there going to be a new AEF anywhere? As promised by the minister at the time of the AEF/VGS announcement?

[muppetofthenorth]

Perhaps it is time for someone to look outside the box and make the VGS facility a truly national youth facility, therefore getting maximum use from equipment and locations which it plainly does not achieve at present.
When the current system is unable to serve the existing organisation it's too much to ask them - with no increase in assets - to serve every other youth organisations out there.

[BEagle]

I think you'll find that those "lovely new hangars" were in fact the very same hangars that were built there in 1940, and the very same ones that I saw and experienced when I was there with 229 OCU.

Believe me - I was on the first of the new Chiv courses in 1980 and those really were lovely new hangars. Clean, properly heated, central systems etc. - the engineers loved them!

[pr00ne]

Believe me - I was on the first of the new Chiv courses in 1980 and those really were lovely new hangars. Clean, properly heated, central systems etc. - the engineers loved them!

Having just had a look on Google earth, am pretty sure that those are the standard wartime T2 and B1 hangars that were there when I went through in the late sixties. Maybe repainted, re clad, new floors and re-equipped throughout, but they are still 1940 vintage T2 and B1 wartime temporary hangars.

[chevvron]

That maybe plan today but after the present situation, will it?
Precisely.
Apparently Aylesbury Vale District Council are happy with all the vast area available on the camp area and haven't yet considered the airfield so why can't the airfield be retained as an 'MOD Airfield' same as Little Rissington.

[POBJOY]

When the current system is unable to serve the existing organisation it's too much to ask them - with no increase in assets - to serve every other youth organisations out there.

You just said it yourself (When the current system is unable to serve it) The equipment is there and is not being utilised because the 'current system' does not work, End Of.
It stopped working years ago, and has just floundered around 'rudder less' with no leadership, and now no staff.
The Grob disposal scandal was just another scandal added to the ongoing list of wasted public assets, and MOD tech incompetence.
When I suggest opening it up to all, that includes alternative organisations to the RAF who are plainly incapable of original thought or current ability to do it themselves.
It is not Covid to blame, but the hapless individuals who were paid to oversee the Cadet organisation at high level, and who betrayed the Volunteers who had never let the Cadets down.

[ACW342]

As a matter of interest, where can I find the civil registration list of ex Air Cadets Grob 109s?

[sycamore]

G-INFO..CAA website.....

[POBJOY]

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1163/kenley_8e57e47fe1faddf4bb07ba7d5a7cc23896a7e9bd.jpg
Kenley (Survivor) 615 (Still going strong) With some help from 111 Squadron which survived until 2011

Well done 615 who have now sent SOLO Cadets 8 years after that dreadful 2014 Easter pause. I admire their 'staying with it attitude' despite the chaos of the past few years. Just confirming how the 'coal face' can deliver the goods despite the odds. Of course being at Kenley they have a tradition to keep up, still surviving and serving despite everything.

[Sky Sports]

Any truth in the duty rumour that the Tutors have been grounded again?

All I can find is a facebook post from 7 AEF saying, "Unfortunately due to Tutor unavailability all flying this weekend has been cancelled at Cranwell. Please do not travel."

[Tay Cough]

Sadly, yes. Of some significance unfortunately.

I’ll let others elaborate.

[EESDL]

Not the usual propeller issue it would appear but possibly connected to broken wing ribs……

[Big Pistons Forever]

Did the Air Cadets ever get a gliding program for cadets to actually fly a glider up and running ?

[unmanned_droid]

Well I flew solo in a Vigilant back in errr 97 I think?

Do you mean post the grounding? Cadets are flying in both powered and unpowered gliders now. The throughput is another matter, but it is happening.

[chevvron]

Well I flew solo in a Vigilant back in errr 97 I think?

Do you mean post the grounding? Cadets are flying in both powered and unpowered gliders now. The throughput is another matter, but it is happening.
I don't think so; all the Vigilants have been given away by MOD.

[POBJOY]

615 VGS at Kenley are certainly back in business and also sending Cadets solo. I think 626 down west suffer from staffing and operate with help from CGS.
All youth based organisations are suffering from a lack of adult staff, and also needing a level of training/experience to give flying instruction makes it a difficult system to maintain. The Vikings have a finite life so a replacement program will be required soon.

[_Agrajag_]

"All youth based organisations are suffering from a lack of adult staff".

This seems all too true. Partly down to the more stringent and intrusive checks now needed. About a year ago our neighbour responded to a request for volunteers to help out at our youth club. He'd recently retired, had worked with the ATC years earlier and thought he might be of some use at the club.

After filling in forms and waiting for several months for clearance he gave up. He now has a part time job in a garden centre instead. I wonder how many others just give up after waiting months for the safeguarding checks? Perhaps if the system was quicker and simpler there might be more people willing to help out.

[unmanned_droid]

I don't think so; all the Vigilants have been given away by MOD.

Thanks, I stand corrected on that point.

[chevvron]

I think 626 down west suffer from staffing and operate with help from CGS.
Hardly surprising since it's stuck away at Predannack in Cornwall with very little 'catchment' but still doing a sterling job; I'm sure there used to be another site at Perranporth . I'm surprised 621 and 637 at Little Rissington have enough resources to go round too.
Yet there's a large 'hole' in VGS placement which could be adequately filled by Halton and Henlow (better not mention Wethersfield) but which the RAF choose not to use; there were always plenty of staff volunteers at both these airfields.
Halton is still well used by the RAFGSA and the powered and miclolight clubs but Henlow is emply of traffic although I see from satellite photos that the grass is kept well mown.
So how many VGS are operating or working towards it?
611 RAF Honington (Working up)
614 MDP Wethersfield (Not operating at the moment)
615 RAF Kenley
621 MOD Little Rissington
622 Army Upavon
626 RNAS Predannack
631 RAF Woodvale (Possibly not operating)
632 RAF Ternhill (Possibly not operating)
637 MOD Little Rissington
644 RAF Syerston (co located with CGS)
645 RAF Topcliffe
661 RAF Kirknewton
NB: Please feel free to update this list if you have better knowledge.
This all shows vast 'holes' in the catchment areas for several parts of the UK especially Wales and Northern Ireland.

[622]

622 Upavon operating!

[chevvron]

622 Upavon operating!
Thank you; list amended.
So apart from Kenley, there is no Air Cadet gliding in the most densely populated part of the country, the south east; Odiham, Abingdon, Halton, Henlow, Tangmere, Manston and probably Wethersfield and from Little Rissington to Honington there is a huge gap.
As Wing Gliding Liaison Officer (WGLO) I used to 'feed' cadets from my 29 Squadrons to courses at 612 Abingdon, 613 Halfon and 616 Henlow so I wonder where the cadets from my wing alone (Herts and Bucks Wing) go for air experience gliding nowadays let alone for weekend courses.