Air Cadets grounded? [Archive] - Page 8

A and C

10th Mar 2016, 22:07

This was more or less what I was saying a few months back.

ACW343

An interesting point of view however you have to trust a contractor to a point and the lost paperwork is something that you would expect not to happen in this industry, it is clear that the RAF/MoD took their eye of the ball but the level of failure to do the job when not being looked at is stunning.

FREDA

As you point out planning permission is needed for the hangar in question and this will take time but once it is granted this sort of construction takes only a few weeks and would fit in with the ramping up of glider recovery rate following the change of VGS support contractor.

ARCLITE01

The hangars at Syerston had been built for the maintenance of gliders but the contractor occupying them has proved to not have the skills to carry out the task so following this failure the MoD has had to look for those with the skills to do the work, clearly you can't move a small but highly skilled workforce from one end of the country to the other without considerable expense and the loss of skilled workers who don't want to commute such distances.
The solution to the problem is to put the aircraft in a trailer and move it to the workforce after all gliders are designed to be de-rigged with the minimum of fuss.

The B Word

10th Mar 2016, 23:06

Allegedly a telephone call similar to this afternoon :}

Caller: "Hello, is that HQ 2FTS?"

HQ 2FTS: "Yes..."

Caller: "This is former OC XXX Volunteer Gliding Squadron. The documents are on my desk with my MoD90 and I've just dropped off the keys to the Squadron at the Main Guard Room. See ya..."

HQ 2FTS: "Any chance you could conduct an inventory check and tidy up?..."

Telephone Line: Brrrrrrrrrr...

ATFQ

10th Mar 2016, 23:46

Following on from the ministerial statement yesterday, the following unclassified RAF briefing note was published on line to give more information to those across the ACO:

"Serial No: 23/16
Date: 10 March 16

AIR CADET AVIATION RELAUNCH

KEY POINTS

• Resolution of airworthiness concerns on gliders which forced an ops pause in Apr 14.
• Conventional and powered gliding with cadets has recommenced.
• A comprehensive cadet avn review has restructured activity, including:

o Implementation of ops, safety, fatigue and maintenance enhancements.
o More accessible gliding that is better controlled and with has greater accountability.
o Provision of new winches, new MT and Infra enhancements for remaining VGSs
o An increased number and network of Tutors and flying hours under 6 FTS command.
o Vigilant will go out of service in 2019, some pilots will transfer to Tutor AEF as VR(T).

• Future gliding will be better for cadets, tauter against a task and more sharply controlled.

BACKGROUND

Pause. In Apr 14 substantial airworthiness issues became apparent on both Viking and Vigilant gliders. A fleet check led to a total loss of airworthiness assurance and all glider flying was paused until the scale of the problem could be determined and a recovery plan put into action. As this was being developed more technical failings emerged, which led to a comprehensive overhaul of the whole gliding enterprise; a refresh from origin of every aircraft’s airworthiness certificate and a re-baseline of all maintenance records. A parallel root and branch review of activity led to a redefining of why we glide, how it is organized and controlled, where it happens and how it is managed. This lengthy and unavoidable pause, was acutely felt and resulted in a reduction in cadet numbers and a dispirited adult volunteer cadre.

Recovery. The review is now complete, the proposals have been approved by CAS, contractors are recovering aircraft and cadets are once again flying. Structural adjustments will accompany the resumption in flying. When at steady state we aim to organise around a ‘cadet aviation offer’ of gliding twice and flying once per year. Where practicable aviation will be no more than 2 hrs drive to optimise training availability and minimize the demand on adult volunteers. To manage fatigue and facilitate training for cadets and staff, a large and ongoing infrastructure investment program is upgrading ops and accommodation blocks. Gliding will be delivered at better resourced regional hubs by a renewed Viking network. Powered flying will be centred on 6 FTS Tutor aircraft – more aircraft, more pilots, more locations and more flying hours. The Vigilant will be phased out by 2019, but will continue to deliver gliding in the N Yorks region until then. Vigilant pilots who meet the minimum flying skills and experience will be offered a cross-over to the Tutor, a transfer to VR(T) service and will complete a CFS-approved course.

Basing. A small number of those retained Viking VGSs will be relocated to optimise delivery of the gliding requirement. This element of the plan is closely tied to the rationalization of the defence estate and requires further detailed analysis before implementation therefore cannot be confirmed until the Footprint Strategy reports later in 2016.

Enhancements. Other significant changes to ACO gliding include an increased investment in the VGS and AEF sites which remain. The provision of accommodation for cadets and staff to undertake residential weekends. Better associated force development and ground training opportunities. Updated operations rooms and sharpened operating procedures. An array of RAF Charitable Trust-funded part-task trainers to introduce synthetics to cadets. A new fleet of the latest glider winch launchers. Optimised command and control, especially clarification of the roles and responsibilities between 2 FTS and the regional comdts. A refocused glider liaison network. A renewed fatigue and safety management system. A reinvigorated 1st, 2nd and 3rd party assurance system. A common syllabus for cadet flying. A shift from ‘air experience’ to ‘flying training’ for cadets. And a re-let glider maintenance contract from Apr 17.

Losses. The withdrawal from service of Vigilant by 2019 will result in the closure of 14 x VGS as powered flying effort shifts to Tutor. These VGSs have extended and colourful histories so this will be sorely felt and their OCs will lose their commands. However, redistribution of activity will meet the cadet requirement more completely, but gliding instructors may have to travel further to their units. Vigilant instructors will need to carefully consider an array of options to determine what best suits their interests. A transfer to Tutor will involve a move into uniformed service, an exacting course but the opportunity to continue powered flying. In sum, these losses are significant but 2 FTS and the ACO will do their best, to accommodate individual preferences.

Summary. The pause to flying was essential and unavoidable and has drawn heavily on the adult volunteer cadre’s good will. With the airworthiness issue fully rectified, a positive overhaul of cadet aviation complete and investment in new and improved infrastructure underway, the ACO will be better served in the long term by a world-class gliding community that is second to none."

A and C

11th Mar 2016, 07:29

Without doubt the inital pause could have been handled better but with what the MAA discovered within the VGS fleet flying had to be stopped at once.

The assumption that it was just a case of getting the contractors to sort things out was the biggest mistake as was not identifying that these contractors used an intimate knowlage of the paperwork system to hide the fact that they did not have the technical knowlage, skills within the workforce and leadership to carry out the work.

When this became apparent the contractors where advised to consult a specialist glider repair company but they even failed to do this with any success.

Enter Babcock....... They have access to the skilled manpower ( all be it limited by industry size ) to fix the problem but they are held back by the current contractors who supply technical services but see Babock failing to deliver to be in their interest............ So enthusiastic support of the Viking recovery project is not on their agenda.

While firing the current contractors is a very tempting option it will stop the recovery program dead in the water, so far better to let the current contracts run until the end of the year, this will allow Babcock and their partners to get their ducks in a row while not attracting the penalty clauses and legal action that termination of a contract would undoubtedly bring.

In my view the Vigilant was in terms of cadet training poor value for money, I have little enthusiasm for a motor glider that did not ever have the motor turned off and kept one cadet busy while all his/her mates are hanging about in the crewroom. Far better all are working on glider launch and recovery.

This will bring clear division between gliding and powered flight and with more Tutor flying will I hope turn AEF into real flying instruction rather than a joyride.

The unfortunate bit is going to be the timescale, not untill the current contractors move on can ( for reasons outlined above ) speedy progress be made, I would expect the tendering for the new support and type certificate holder support to be announced very shortly and the winners of the contracts to be in post on 01 Jan 17. Until then a slow flow of servicable Vikings will continue and instructors be able to renew their ratings...... Who knows some cadets might get to fly.

Like most of those on this forum I see this whole farce as one of the RAF's darkest moments but from the RAF side it has largely been brought about by a lack of resources in money and manpower forcing people of goodwill to take their eye of the VGS ball while watching two or three front line balls, no doubt thinking "it's only a glider, how can they f^^* it up ?"

With the dent in the prestige of this debacle the RAF is determined to get the air cadet flying program back on track, they now have some very bright people working on the project and will get things on track but it will not happen overnight.

BEagle

11th Mar 2016, 07:32

Better associated force development and ground training opportunities. Updated operations rooms and sharpened operating procedures. An array of RAF Charitable Trust-funded part-task trainers to introduce synthetics to cadets.

How ever did the Air Cadets manage without all that back in the days of the T21 etc.?

Rather better than today, I would imagine.

Vigilant instructors will need to carefully consider an array of options to determine what best suits their interests. A transfer to Tutor will involve a move into uniformed service, an exacting course but the opportunity to continue powered flying. In sum, these losses are significant but 2 FTS and the ACO will do their best, to accommodate individual preferences.

I'm sure there'll be a huge level of interest in such a transfer.....:rolleyes:

A shift from ‘air experience’ to ‘flying training’ for cadets.

It will be interesting to see what level of experience and training is deemed necessary for ex-Vigilant pilots to provide safe and effective 'flying training' to air cadets, given that each cadet is only likely to fly 'once per year'....

lightbluefootprint

11th Mar 2016, 07:46

To be fair (and I have not and will not ever be described as a fan of OC 2FTS) if the above mentioned Regional Hubs end up lodged with the Regional Aerospace Centres on stations with other concurrent activities, I can see what used to be half a day's flying turning into something more like a weekend camp. When I was an ATC Sqn Cdr we tried to do this informally by booking the barrack range or any other facility we could on or off station. From the cadet's viewpoint (and they should be the reason ACO staff are doing this if we're being honest) that might be a good thing. If the undertaking of flying once a year and gliding twice a year is meant per cadet, then that is going to be interesting. My Sqn had an average strength of around 60 eligible cadets, that would have required five places per month, and with a large staff team and us making a positive attempt to secure every slot we could (picking up short notice vacancies - schmoozing the AEF Cdr!) we had no chance of achieving that. I hope for the cadets it works, but I am not optimistic.

Speaking as someone with plenty of years in them, as a purist I won't miss the Vigilant experience personally. It was never true gliding, and I made a point of telling everyone who hadn't done a proper winch launch to grab the opportunity, because the two do not compare. Flying in anything is great fun, but I think over the last however long the Vigilant has been around, a lot of cadets have missed out on what I consider proper gliding.

skua

11th Mar 2016, 09:13

" 2 hour drive", presumably one way. 4 hours for a single launch?!

POBJOY

11th Mar 2016, 10:15

Well what we can be assured of is the 'Solo' option for Cadets is going to be a dwindling facility.
So we will have gone from an organisation that sent 'hundreds' of Cadets solo every year to a system of dual rides and little chance to do it alone; Wow what progress.
Loads more money spent,lots more meetings,loads of Yuk Speak reports,more misleading statements,less Cadet flying,and now CFS course's to boot !!!!

Arclite01

11th Mar 2016, 10:41

Well even when I was at Watton with 611VGS or Sealand with 631VGS many Cadets had a 2 hour road journey to get to us and fly so in all honesty that's not new................ only at 625VGS @ Hullavington did most of the 'clients' have a reasonable journey length/time as we captured Swindon, Bristol, Gloucester, Oxford, Reading, Slough and several other medium sized towns in a 1 hour radius of travel, and we had accommodation on site as well (inc cookhouse food), good hangarage and onsite POL as well - all on a great airfield. Oh yes - and that is the one we are closing isn't it !! (awesome decision).

This plan also assumes that squadron staff can be found to cover 'yet another' weekend away including an overnight, that transport and drivers can be found for minibuses, that food can be provided (including vegetarian) and that the segregated accommodation can be operated and 'policed' for both sexes............... bearing in mind that many of the VGS operate on non-RAF, non-24hr sites in the middle of nowhere.

...............Not to mention when are the Cadets going to do their homework and College work, many of my students could spend 1 day at the VGS and 1 day doing college work - this plan scuppers that - and we should not estimate just how important College is nowadays to our bright stars..............

I think that the endgame will be a reduction in capability and a reduction in fun. But by then many of the people with experience of the past will have left anyway so there will be no baseline to compare it to. The figures will be wrapped up in 'spin' and everyone will say it's all 'hunky dorey' and it should have been done years ago...............

Losers = Cadets and Staff (not to mention UK Plc)
Winners = Accountants, Politicians and Career Monkeys (the usual)

Arc

DC10RealMan

11th Mar 2016, 10:45

I believe that the new PR team is headed by a Professor Pangloss.

Martin the Martian

11th Mar 2016, 12:02

With regard to where the existing VGS' will be based, I think there will be a lot of shuffling around of units, particularly in light of the regional emphasis. 626 at Predannack is not slated for disbanding, but there is no way that the Lizard peninsula could ever be described as 'regional' and there is certainly no overnight accommodation there. I suspect it will be on the move, maybe to replace the Vigilants at Chivenor.

BBK

11th Mar 2016, 12:02

Can we stop the Vigilant bashing please. It did the job it was meant to which is more than can be said for others in this shameful debacle. :=

Arclite01

11th Mar 2016, 12:16

I was/am a Vigilant fan in the role it performed

I still believe there is a role for the Motorglider in ACO Gliding Ops (IMHO)

Arc

A and C

11th Mar 2016, 12:40

rich_hodgetts

11th Mar 2016, 12:46

Has anyone heard anything regarding the requirements to convert from Vigilant to Tutor?

brokenlink

11th Mar 2016, 12:51

All I know is that here in the east we will lose 2/3 of our capacity for gliding. Wethersfield will require significant investment to accommodate cadets/staff overnight. That presupposes staff can spare yet another weekend away to take cadets. I wish the "pain and grief" calculations were made BEFORE these daft ideas were taken forward.

VX275

11th Mar 2016, 13:06

Can we stop the Vigilant bashing please. It did the job it was meant to which is more than can be said for others in this shameful debacle.
Most cadets couldn't care less about the purity of gliding in a Vigilant. The silly toothy post solo grin was the same irrespective of the type of aircraft they had completed it in.
I fear that in the new regime there will be far fewer silly grins.

Arclite01

11th Mar 2016, 13:15

A&C

The money never gets back to the generator of the revenue. It all goes to Treasury.

I do agree with your underlying comments though re: Vigilant, I think MoD should have been looking to buy a Vigilant replacement (and should do anyway) as the out of service date was originally 2025 anyway............. and actually should already be considering Viking replacement as well.

Arc

Sook

11th Mar 2016, 13:28

A&C

I flew engine off in a Vigilant a number of times through my cadet and staff career, and very pleasant it was too.

Shaft109

11th Mar 2016, 14:04

https://youtu.be/yjR3aLpYd6k

Arclite01

11th Mar 2016, 14:19

Sook

I've flown it engine off as well, pleasant handling, stable platform and surprisingly good visibility but unless you have a solid 4Kts all round it just does not climb in a thermal !!

I still think it did a good job circuit bashing.

Sad to see it go.

Arc

Thorr

11th Mar 2016, 14:50

It is not a case of vigilant bashing but the facts, the aircraft is a motor glider that has been operated as a powerd aircraft because turning the engine off was prohibited by the VGS.

The result of this is that the fleet has a lot of engine hours on an engine that is no longer supported and so without a very costly engine retrofit the fleet will die.

Far better to sell the aircraft to people who can husband the engine life by using it as a true motor glider while it still has a value and pump the recovered money into other forms of air cadet flying.

This is not vigilant bashing, it's jus being pragmatic.

The engine could be turned off and was frequently done so. And let us not forget, motor gliding has been part of the air cadet organisation since 1978 and was suited to sites where conventional gliding could not take place.

Even if the engines were time expired, or getting close, then why not retrofit, or replace the aircraft entirely. It happens with other military aircraft, so why not the air cadet motor glider? Far better to have a larger glider footprint, and a mix of types that enable you to operate from a range of sites throughout the country, that a scattered handful that will not be able to meaningfully support the cadets. Gliding was the ATCs USP - what is the organisation without that?

Thorr

11th Mar 2016, 14:54

So what happens when volunteers can't stay overnight to supervise cadets?

Who is going to feed the cadets?

What happens when squadron staff don't want to carry out a five hour round trip to a VGS?

How much flying will a member of staff be able to do if he has got a 2.5 hr journey at the start and end of each day?

Ill thought out ideas from a management who have little regard for their greatest resource.

Arclite01

11th Mar 2016, 15:03

Thorr

My point exactly at #1767 :-)

Arc

Sook

11th Mar 2016, 15:27

I'll just leave this here without comment.

ylazZH2eBuI

incubus

11th Mar 2016, 15:53

Thorr - or the cadets can't make a weekend because they work Saturday or Sunday or because they don't want to waste a full weekend on the activity?

Will it herald the end of gliding for female cadets due to the near impossibility sometimes of getting female staff cover?

Arclite01

11th Mar 2016, 16:00

Unless there are permanent staff ?? and a smaller volunteer cadre (a la TA)

Arc

POBJOY

11th Mar 2016, 16:11

Quote from brief

Future Gliding Flying will be better for Cadets, 'tauter' against a task and more sharply controlled ** !!!!!

What sort of P.... writes this crap,and what sort of 'Leadership' lets them do it.
Are we the only ones who see it for what it is; utter drivel and a pathetic attempt to rewrite history and paper over the 'chasms' of COMPLETE FAILURE.
Not enough Swords in the system to fall upon.

**I thought it was the definitive description of the perfect winch launch,but then reasoned that they would have no idea about such things.

This has to be the worst 75th anniversary for anything anywhere,yet they still think they are doing a great job. If youngsters have any sense they will join the Scouts and get real; but then they have a LEADER.

Frelon

11th Mar 2016, 16:55

Well Pobjoy (and others) I share the utter frustration of not being able to do anything to help. The jewel in the Crown of the Air Cadets that we loved and knew well has been plucked out and will be replaced with what will turn out to be a paste replica.

Remember all those hours we put in on the winches and not a training video in sight. I find it amazing that they have to be taught how to wear a pair of gloves now!! Have a look at this YouTube video...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMDxZytq8ZE

I wonder how we ever got on without this sort of briefing? The senior staff cadet used to sit on the petrol tank and said pull this and push that - and it worked!

Nice to dream about winches, pity there are no gliders to launch from them - well not just yet anyway!

Bill Macgillivray

11th Mar 2016, 20:41

This is unreal!! I am totally lost for words (if you know me then you may be surprised!), however, the whole sorry story reeks of poor leadership, mal-administration and a TOTAL lack of insight into the Air Training Corps volunteers and cadets!! I went solo at Exeter in the early '50's and carried on in the RAF and other "places" as a pilot for many years. ALL down to the Air Training Corps! Seems that the current cadets are being let down in a big way! (Indeed, I know they are because I still work with a local squadron). A total disaster! Still, Happy 75th birthday!!!

DC10RealMan

11th Mar 2016, 20:58

Still think of the up side.

Bonuses and Knighthoods all round for the "Executives" for services to the Air Cadet Corps and I suspect a further extension of personal contracts to age 80.

Bonuses all round HURRAH!!!

After all its only taxpayers money.

ATFQ

11th Mar 2016, 21:57

1st(?) BBC Story

Air cadet gliding scrapped at St Athan and Swansea - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-35777707?SThisFB)

Cat Funt

11th Mar 2016, 22:31

Isn't it an amazing coincidence that the blueprint for recovery from this cluster**** bears an uncanny resemblance to the plan Middleton was pushing four to five years ago as RC North- long before the MAA ****storm was on anybody's radar? This, I feel, is the crux of the problem and why I think that few will continue to press on and fly AEF (presumably for free, while UAS cadets get paid). The leadership of the ACO, 22Gp and beyond, no longer than any credibility amongst the volunteers due to their ineptitude, deceitfulness and gross negligence from start to finish.

If this was the plan two years ago, then the guys and girls on the VGSs should have been told two f*****g years ago, so they could have gone on with their lives. As it is, they've taken time and effort to keep their sqns together; kept up with admin bollocks, including being bored to death by trappers' PowerPoint presentations, ironically telling them all about things like "Just culture". They've come up with their own training programmes to try and prevent skill fade and been asked by the powers at be to engage with and train local cadet units. They've been dragged to public events and airshows to sell the idea of the Air Cadets as somewhere kids can learn to fly. Finally, when the RAF has all the pieces are in place, they pull the rug from underneath the volunteers, claiming that it's a ministerial decision when everyone knows that the Minister is simply ordering from the menu that's been pushed under his nose. Why, in God's name, would any right-minded person want to continue to be manipulated and exploited in such a way?

Thorr

11th Mar 2016, 22:39

The Vultures are circling! I know from persons in know, that there are some individuals and organisations looking to snap up the vigilants as since as they are released for disposal. No doubt, they will be sold off at a low price - given they are not "airworthy". And guess how long those who buy them will get them back in the air! Doubt it will be 2 years! What will that say for the organisation that has said the situation is unrecoverable....

RUCAWO

11th Mar 2016, 22:45

Lots of staff, not just on the VGSs , are thinking hard about their futures, I have only felt like this once before when the RUC changed to the PSNI and I saw the RUC crests being ripped from the station wall at midnight on the date of the changeover.
In reality ,especially in NI what can we now offer cadets that others can't ?

ATFQ

11th Mar 2016, 23:05

From yesterday's ministerial statement, all we know for now is which VGSs have survived, not where they are going to be located:

'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'.

This is a very real threat. It is not that easy generally these days to relocate a Viking VGS to another airfield 'just up the road' (that just happens to be in the right sort of catchment area, which is suitable for winch launching, and where other tenants do not already have their own busy operations to manage).

So, which of the following 10 planned VGS sites is 'safe' [I have assumed that Syerston is], and what should be (or is being) done to protect them?

Kirknewton (661)
Topcliffe (645)
Woodvale (631)
Ternhill (632)
Little Rissington (637)
Wethersfield (614)
Kenley (615)
Upavon (622)
Merryfield (621)
Predannack (626)

I really do hope that the RAF's most senior officers are making strong representations on the importance of Air cadet gliding to the long-term viability of the Air Cadet Organisation and hence the importance of retaining these sites. I really do hope that this is happening and that it is not being left to chance on the assumption that the Defence Infrastructure Organisation and others will work it out for themselves; they won't.

RUCAWO

12th Mar 2016, 06:08

This is a heartfelt post on Facebook by a close friend of mine, as well as being a former cadet, a current member of staff but due to his love of flying gained in the ATC a former AAC pilot. I have his permission to share this.

Hi All
Yesterday we got the shock news that the Reserve Armed Forces minister has backed the OC 2FTS to slash the Air Cadet Volunteer Gliding Squadrons from 25 to 11 in our 75th Anniversary Year.
The decision is shocking and is based purely on monitory terms and takes the Air out of the Air Training Corps.
We in Northern Ireland are affected more than any region, now that we do not have any flying assets within Northern Ireland.
We are promised an Air Experience Flight (AEF) sometime in the future which could be up to 2 years maybe more away.
Our cadets have a chance of flying by travelling to Woodvale by lLiverpool once a year, they travel across and many a time do not fly due to weather, they don't get another chance that year!!
If we are fortunate, we might get flying at annual camps, in my experience over the last 3 years of camps which I have been Camp Commandant, we haven't had any AEF. Always excuses why they cannot provide flights for camps!!
Voyager flights have been promised, nothing provided, helicopter flights by Joint Helicopter Command have been promised, again nothing has materialise. Our mother service, the Royal Air Force, doesn't give a flying f*** about there cadet organisation, the Air Cadets, ATC and CCF (RAF).
I have been an Officer in the RAF VR(T) for 24 years and feel so demotivated by this move. What makes it worse for me, my son who is a cadet in the ATC and CCF (RAF) became 16 just after the grounding, not the paused to flying that OC 2FTS likes to call it, the grounding of all the gliders just when he became eligible to apply for a Gliding Scholarship.
There will be no gliding opportunity available for him during the rest of his time in the Corps, his only chance of a flying qualification would be if he was selected for a Flying Scholarship.
With this decision to cut the VGS, you would think they would have increased the number of Flying Scholarship available? No, Northern Ireland only got one cadet selected to receive a Flying Scholarship for 2016.
I am sorry for this long winded FB message, but I feel aggrieved for every cadet in the Corps and all the VGS staff who now find themselves displaced by this decision and by the Corps.
I ask if you would like this page, and if you have some connection, write, phone, email the people named and contact your MP.

:D:D

POBJOY

12th Mar 2016, 07:57

It is quite obvious that the Air Cadets have no real leadership anymore and also very little reason to stay aligned with the the RAF.
If i were a Cadet and saw the likes of the chief scout (Bear Grylls) swinging aloft on his Para Glider (powered) i would think 'I am off to join an organisation that actually does things without the B....S.....' If enough extra air minded youngsters do this the Scouts can increase the 'Air' bit (there have always been Air Scouts) and even start up their own flying wing (no shortage of qualified instructors out there now !!!!) with time on their hands.
JM and his band of nit wits can then go take a hike and play with the part task trainers and do extra sewing classes to get those left up to speed on correct badge fitment.Those in charge are a disgrace and have had no real thought for the lack of leadership and faith for the youngsters who are being shafted. Now where is my old woggle and Baden Powell hat !!!

tmmorris

12th Mar 2016, 09:08

ATFQ I did rather hope they might close Rissington and move 637 into Abingdon - as one suspects the army would like to keep it open for weekday use and the VGS could do weekends.

No doubt they'll say the area is too unsafe for winching...

VX275

12th Mar 2016, 10:03

Why move 637 to Abingdon? 612 were (are) already there and were a statistically more efficient Squadron anyway

TheChitterneFlyer

12th Mar 2016, 10:26

Who the hell dreamed this up? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMDxZytq8ZE

How to wear a pair of gloves? It then shows the instructor NOT wearing any gloves! Handover of control and how to bail out, door jettison... JUMP, JUMP, JUMP ... how pathetic. It's a winch for God's sake! Why jump and risk breaking a leg when there's a perfectly good ladder?

If this is a typical brief of how to do stuff then it wouldn't surprise me to learn that it would take two years of training before anyone would get even close to an aeroplane. Lessons in growing up would be more appropriate.

Lima Juliet

12th Mar 2016, 10:27

I believe that the Army have applied for a Drop Zone at Abingdon as they plan to start parachuting there soon?

GR7

12th Mar 2016, 10:38

That spoof winch training video is commedy gold. For those unaware it is a near perfect mimic of the VGS safety video which is shown to the cadets.

To those who made it - top effort lads!

TheChitterneFlyer

12th Mar 2016, 10:45

That spoof winch training video is commedy gold. For those unaware it is a near perfect mimic of the VGS safety video which is shown to the cadets.

To those who made it - top effort lads!

Hook, line and sinker!

TCF

Random Bloke

12th Mar 2016, 11:31

Look at any of the books available on project management and most, if not all, mention the 6 phases of any big project. While a cynical view it comes from their seemingly inherent tendency towards chaos if not managed properly:

1. Enthusiasm,
2. Disillusionment,
3. Panic and hysteria,
4. Hunt for the guilty,
5. Punishment of the innocent, and
6. Honours for the uninvolved.

This project is probably at stage 3 at the moment...

tmmorris

12th Mar 2016, 11:32

Why move 637? Because 612 are being disbanded. Suggest you read the announcement...

biscuit74

12th Mar 2016, 11:42

So, no more ATC presence in Wales, Northern Ireland or Northern Scotland. In fact the only remaining ATC site outside England seems to be Kirknewton.
I wonder how much longer before a second shrinkage to two or three sites only, across the country?

Very much as many on here predicted, but a shameful shambles nonetheless.

Sad.

ACW342

12th Mar 2016, 13:03

Biccie 74, here is a copy of an email I have sent to the First Minister of Northern Ireland, copied to the First Ministers of Scotland and Wales. I also wonder what the husband and father-in-law of the Honorary Air Commodore in Chief will think when they discover that some wazzers in the ACO have killed off all ACO flying within both future kings principality. Anyway with some Per Ardua Ad Astra maybe we'll get some proper aviation "Venture Adventure" back again.

Annexe 1: Written statement - Mr Julian Brazier, (Parliamentary under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence))

Annexe 2: Percentage efficiency figures, Volunteer Gliding Squadrons (2011, Last figures available, but note that there has been no VGS flying since 2014)

First Minister,
The Air Training Corps in Northern Ireland has been in existence since the early days of the second world war. Among the many activities available to cadets is the opportunity to be provided with gliding induction flights between the age of 13 3/4 and 16 and, from age 16 are able to apply for a gliding course which, if showing the aptitude can lead to them flying solo (long before they can legally drive). Those cadets who show a high aptitude can have further advanced gliding training and where applicable may become staff cadets at the gliding school, eventually rising through the organisation to become instructors themselves.

Gliding training for cadets in Northern Ireland, up until the pause mentioned in the written statement, has been provided by 664 Volunteer Gliding Squadron (VGS) based at Newtownards airfield, with, occasionally, weekly residential courses at Central Gliding School at RAF Syerston in Nottinghamshire.

Many cadets in Northern Ireland have caught the “aviation bug” through flying with 664 VGS and have been spurred on by their desire to continue flying professionally. There are now ex cadets from Northern Ireland flying with the RAF, the Fleet Arm, The Army Air Corps and the Irish Air Corps. Others are flying with the Airlines many on long haul with Virgin Atlantic and British Airways. If you are flying out of the International or City airports and the captain or co-pilot has a Northern Ireland accent, it is highly likely that their interest in aviation was kindled by their first ever flight with 664 VGS.

This has now come to an end. With the ministerial statement the cadets in Northern Ireland are now going to be restricted to applying/competing for what will be much sought after residential courses at the Central Gliding school. If the weather at the time is poor, it is highly likely that the cadets will not complete the course and will return home without their wings and no possibility of being re-coursed. And, of course, for those who show the aptitude, there will be no opportunity to become staff cadets, thus removing the likely first step in their possible future career.

It is worthy of note that these decisions mean that all air cadet flying within the Principality of Wales will cease. With the choice of 661 VGS at Kirk Newton being chosen as the only gliding squadron in Scotland and the problems associated both with the squadron and infrastructure problems at the airfield, it is my contention that this will not happen and that, therefore, there will be no air cadet gliding within Scotland.

This then leads me to think that the organisation and locations of all air cadet gliding will now be England centric brought about by “Little Englander” thinking by those decision makers in Headquarters Air Training Corps (HQAC) and No. 2 Flying Training School. Furthermore the opportunities and advancements offered to English cadets will be denied to those cadets fortunate enough to be living in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

RUCAWO

12th Mar 2016, 13:11

Nicely done Mike ;)

biscuit74

12th Mar 2016, 15:20

I agree with RUCAWO; very nicely written ACW342. Thanks

RUCAWO

12th Mar 2016, 16:47

You couldn't make it up !

News story
Minister visits RAF Cadets and volunteers in Scotland
From:Ministry of Defence and Julian Brazier MP First published:12 March 2016
Minister for Reserves, Julian Brazier, has visited RAF Kirknewton to see how RAF Air Cadets and volunteers gain flight experience training.

After being shown around the facilities of 661 Volunteer Gliding Squadron (VGS), the Minister chatted to Cadets and volunteers as they demonstrated radio controlled flying. He also took the opportunity to see how he performed on their newly installed flight simulator – known as a PTT (part task trainer) and funded by the RAF Charitable Trust – that will help teach Cadets the basics of flying before they get to try out the real thing.
The Minister’s visit follows the re-launch of Air Cadet gliding, which will focus the units on regional hubs and provide Cadets with more opportunities to experience fixed-wing flying as well as rebuilding gliding programme, and allowing Cadets to obtain the coveted ACO Glider Wings. He also praised the work of the committed volunteer staff at Kirknewton who help to keep the RAF’s Air Cadets flying.
Mr Brazier said:
I am very impressed by the enthusiasm and skill of the cadets here in Scotland, as well as the commitment and dedication of the volunteer staff who offer this high quality flying training, and provide inspiration and leadership to generations of air cadets.
Squadron Leader Eddie Carr, Officer Commanding 661 VGS at Kirknewton said of the new simulator:
Without funding from the RAF Charitable Trust this wouldn’t have been possible. Everyone involved in Air Cadet gliding is very grateful to the Charitable Trust for its generosity.
The Minister also saw the work undertaken to improve the airfield, the cadet and staff accommodation blocks and the administrative area. As part of a wider strategy on Air Cadet basing, the Kirknewton site will expand into the regional hub for Scotland, and become a Glider Centre of Excellence to support Air Cadets from across Scotland.

VX275

12th Mar 2016, 16:59

Why move 637? Because 612 are being disbanded. Suggest you read the announcement...

I have read the announcement, I've also read the letter sent to all the VGS staff. They're out to disband 14 Squadrons at 14 sites, so why disband one and then move the surviving one to the site of one that was disbanded - although on the evidence of the past two years that is the logic they would use.
Rissy has just had a fortune spent on it Abingdon hasn't its a simple decision for the bean counters.
As Leon has pointed out there are plans to move a skydiving outfit into Abingdon that combined with the proposed southern enlargement of Brize Zone the PPL community in this country will not be happy as the Brize / Benson gap will finally be closed.

POBJOY

12th Mar 2016, 17:11

DIB DIB DIB DOB DOB DOB LAUNCH LAUNCH LAUNCH

Sorry chaps the time has come for those with any B...s to jump ship and get something going in an organisation that knows what it is doing.
Nothing to loose as with JM still in charge and nobody up top to query what is happening the ATC are doomed to be a nanny unit that provides no-hopers with a safe job and pension.
As a firing squad is unlikely to be convened the best available option is to give them no troops to command.
ALL MP's should be appraised as to how huge amounts of money have been wasted providing NOTHING,and the lack of Cadet self motivation that has been lost.The organisation has not only lost its way it it can not even read a map.

POBJOY

12th Mar 2016, 17:45

ATFQ

12th Mar 2016, 18:22

https://blondegeography.wordpress.com/2016/03/12/we-would-like-some-answers-please/

taxydual

12th Mar 2016, 19:26

Re This is worth reading

To whom is it addressed?

I hope it's to the Private Secretary of the Honorary Air Commandant.

chevvron

12th Mar 2016, 22:25

The 'dwindling' numbers of PPL'rs will no doubt be aware that MATZ are not 'controlled airspace' although it is usual practice to contact them.
However there is a difference between legal requirement and courtesy to make contact and inform them of your intentions.
The ATZ is theirs but the MATZ bit is advisory for Civil traffic. In practice a well run unit will always wish to speed things along, however lazy ones attempt to send traffic 'around the house's' and this is not GOOD AIR TRAFFIC.After all we have far less military aircraft in the system now so why the pressure.
True a MATZ is uncontrolled class G airspace however, if the CAA approve an increase in the size of the Brize Zone, it will be class D controlled airspace.

More likely would be a Danger Area as presently exists at Weston-on-the-Green which I presume the Abingdon DZ will replace; this could be activated by NOTAM thus leaving the airspace class G when not in use for paras.
Hm Weston already has a gliding club; it would be an excellent place for a Viking VGS if the paras move out.

VGSGirls

13th Mar 2016, 07:47

Any idea where we find a copy of the original Middleton stuff? Be interesting to read before bombarding him with questions.

POBJOY

13th Mar 2016, 08:09

Chev Brize is not in my 'usual' operating area;what is happening there that requires more controlled airspace,and does the zone have to be from SFC as opposed to a stepped extension that is less onerous to other users.
Down west Civil Newquay is requesting the ability to have a 'Drone Zone' circle that would operate for short periods for UAV deployment and recovery.This is so they can team up with Aberporth to cover a block of airspace already designated as Danger Area's.
As with all airspace requirements it is important for 'other users' to input the consultation so as to keep a balance in the system.
Looking out of my window this morning and thinking back to my 615 days and how we would have had all the kit checked and ready by now and the Austin would be collecting 'bods' for a Naffi / Airmens mess run for breakfast.
Can not really believe how the powers to be have destroyed our organisation and replaced capability with clots.

ATFQ

13th Mar 2016, 09:03

https://petition.parliament.uk/

Two facts that I didn't know:

If a petition gets 10,000 signatures, the government will respond.

If a petition gets 100,000 signatures, it will be considered for debate in Parliament.

There have been almost 350,000 views of this Thread (admittedly including many return visitors). There are currently around 60,000 Air Cadets and Adult Volunteers, with many times more ex-cadets and staff. And I wonder how many cadets the Air Cadet Organisation has sent solo since it came into existence: probably not too far off 100,000. Perhaps more.

tmmorris

13th Mar 2016, 10:46

Ah, but remember HQAC monitors this forum and can and will discipline those questioning the decision.

1.3VStall

13th Mar 2016, 11:16

tmmorris,

I started as an ATC cadet 52 years ago and, like many in that era, my three solo controlled crashes in a Cadet Mk III sparked my career in aviation. After nearly 28 years in the RAF and 18 years in the airline industry I still fly/glide/tug/instruct as a hobby.

Anyone from HQAC, or 2 FTS, who monitors this thread would be very welcome to come and try to "discipline me". Indeed, I would relish the chance to tell them face to face what an utter and disgraceful shambles the last two years have been and what a pathetic, and expensive, solution is now proposed to try and get cadets back into the air.

My sympathies lie not only with the youngsters who continue to be so badly let down, but also with the many VGS volunteers who have now been cr@pped upon from a great height.

Those who continue to be responsible for this continuing cluster**** should hang their heads in shame - but I know they won't. As ever, there is no accountability for failure in the public sector.

Rant over!

RUCAWO

13th Mar 2016, 11:32

What are they going to do, ground us ?

POBJOY

13th Mar 2016, 12:52

Hi HQ Air Cadets,and Syerston
How does the 'Leadership' feel about the way this great organisation has been completely failed by those 'paid' and 'charged' with its operational planning and provision of services that are not being provided.
If you had ANY sense of doubt about how badly let down the Cadets have been then make no mistake it is the biggest C......F.... in its whole history and an utter disgrace in its 75th year.
Of course as you have absolutely no idea how the Corps should be run or what it needs then perhaps some resignations are required to at least admit how you all have lost the plot and are incapable of original thought in aviation matters.
Anyway you can now have another load of meetings and 'cascade' utter C... among yourselves but do not bother to close the stable door now the b.....horses have not only left they are not coming back. Well done i hope you can sleep well, and think about the damage caused by the useless excuses of 'staff' that stalk the corridors of power under the illusion they have any idea
of what to do or how to do it.
You sorry bunch would never had got through staff cadet selection in my day.

ACW342

13th Mar 2016, 17:36

PobJoy, Pobjoy, tsk tsk. I thought you would have learnt from my #1646 - There is no honour, there will be no falling on swords, there are no pistols to have an accident with whilst cleaning. Not at all. there is, however, CYA and ships not seen.

ACW VGL

14th Mar 2016, 07:45

You can't knock success. As a tax payer, ex-Vigi instructor and a member of one of the 14 ex-VGS, I would like to complement the Commandant of 2 FTS on his new HQ and the fortitude he has shown in carefully selecting and sticking to his aim in his version of improving the ACO gliding movement. Complaints and petitions are pointless, as it is a done deal. I will not look for a new school, will not re-roll as a ground instructor, and will not take up a VR(T) commission - I did 20 years as a regular. One fewer volunteer civi flying service aircraft - aim achieved.

Arclite01

14th Mar 2016, 09:35

This will have been sold on cost savings - flavour of the month as we all know............

Then it will have been sold on 'Improved efficiency' - flavour of the month as we all know.................

Then it will have been sold on 'doing more with less' - flavour of the month as we all know..................

The flaw of course is that there is no continuity in Government or the Military model. By the time it's realised in 5 years time that the costs are higher (including relocation, additional travel and facilities build), that the number of hours and launches are way down on what they used to be, and the actual flying per head is reduced over what it used to be, and actually we have no less than we used to have, it's all too late and those who made the decision are either retired or long gone on the political merry-go-round.................

Losers = Cadets and Staff (and UK Plc)
Winners = Bean Counters and Politicians who 'can see no further than their next full belly................'

Arc

POBJOY

14th Mar 2016, 10:10

ACW VGL
Do not despair; write to Bear Grylls and offer your services and experience (with others) to expand the Air Scouts. I would be surprised if the idea was ignored and with so many qualified and 'cleared' people out there i bet the Scouts will be pleased to use them. Nothing to loose as the ATC as we know it is doomed anyway,as apart from anything else is has no LEADERSHIP to speak of but lots of youth motivated staff that can easily adapt to making fires and camping.Chief Scouts are always 'doer's' so B........s to Sleaford control and Syerston and help the Scouts (under the BGA GSA)
Better to use all that experience and tradition towards promoting Air Mindness to the future youth,rather than let it die.The Cadet organisation will go nowhere under its present leadership so why not give another organisation the chance to benefit. Scout Motto BE PREPARED easy to remember for cable breaks. Dib Dib Dib

Chris Gains

14th Mar 2016, 14:06

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124333

ShyTorque

14th Mar 2016, 15:12

I've kept quiet about this so far but what a total wasteful farce this has turned out to be. As a cadet some forty five years ago I was lucky enough to be allowed a gliding scholarship course and went solo at a very young age. That set me on my way to becoming a professional pilot. At one time I was also the Air Cadet Liaison Officer at a certain helicopter base. Later, my daughter became a senior ATC cadet. Unfortunately, in her four years with the organisation she only had the opportunity to fly once (let's not forget other problems with propellers coming off Tutor aircraft, also seat harness problems). Thinking I could give something back, I volunteered my services as an erstwhile gliding instructor. However, It quickly became obvious to me how things were rapidly going downhill with the organisation. I spoke to some other instructors (other professional pilots) who were already very disillusioned and sadly decided it really had little future for me. How right I was. What a shame for the organisation and for the kids who no longer have the same opportunities we had years ago in what was then a supposedly impoverished Great Britain.

Wander00

14th Mar 2016, 16:14

Petition - signed

thepaused

14th Mar 2016, 16:18

There is no doubt that Air Cadet gliding has been damaged to such a point that it will only ever be a shadow of its former self and I understand why people feel the need for petitions and protests. There is however still an ATC gliding organisation in the UK and if the recovery plan goes ahead in something similar to its current form many cadets will still get the chance to experience gliding. I do however worry that raising the general public's awareness of what has gone on in the past, how much has already been spent and how much more will be required in the future is only likely to lead to more financial scrutiny and even tighter purse strings.

Avtur

14th Mar 2016, 16:25

Signed #1751. Good Luck.

Aggamemnon

14th Mar 2016, 16:46

@thepaused

I do however worry that raising the general public's awareness of what has gone on in the past, how much has already been spent and how much more will be required in the future is only likely to lead to more financial scrutiny and even tighter purse strings.

I disagree; proper oversight may well have prevented this shambles from ever occurring.

POBJOY

14th Mar 2016, 18:45

Signed Nothing to loose

lightbluefootprint

14th Mar 2016, 18:47

How on earth the initial problem with the poor governance of the ACO gliding fleet happened in the first place must raise a question about the oversight of private companies working on military contracts. Secondly how did HQAC get caught with its admin trousers down given its fetishistic preoccupation of getting volunteers to risk assess everything from expeditions to the use of kettles on squadrons?

VX275

14th Mar 2016, 22:16

How does a member of the public contact the RAF Police to ask if the 'loss' of the aircraft records has been properly investigated?
Twenty five years of Form 700 sheets from over a hundred aircraft must be several four drawer cabinets worth of paper which would be difficult for the most incompetent to accidentally lose. Their 'destruction' must therefore have been a deliberate act and as such someone is personally responsible to the crown for these aircraft being taken out of service.

Why oh why

15th Mar 2016, 08:03

You need to get off your high horse and acquaint yourself with current military documentation.
As I posted earlier there is NO requirement under military engineering to maintain every item of documentation. Major plus 6 months suffices. Repetitive minor out of phase servicing may be disposed of one servicing superceeded And on a Viking VGS which I flew at that would mean the maximum duration kept would be 36 months plus 6 months.

How does a member of the public contact the RAF Police to ask if the 'loss' of the aircraft records has been properly investigated?
Twenty five years of Form 700 sheets from over a hundred aircraft must be several four drawer cabinets worth of paper which would be difficult for the most incompetent to accidentally lose. Their 'destruction' must therefore have been a deliberate act and as such someone is personally responsible to the crown for these aircraft being taken out of service.

50+Ray

15th Mar 2016, 09:27

Petition signed. ATC provided my first flight, first solo, first powered solo, and began a 40+ year flying career. Tragic how few opportunities are left for youth of today.
Ray

1.3VStall

15th Mar 2016, 11:01

Signed - keep the signatures coming!

VX275

15th Mar 2016, 11:04

Why oh why

15th Mar 2016, 12:47

Indeed you may.

Maintenance records should be retained until the work it records has been
invalidated by documented work carried out subsequently (for example, Scheduled
Base Maintenance (SBM), Major maintenance, or equivalent); RA4311 and MAP-01
Chapter 7.6 provides further regulation and guidance in this respect.

Can I refer the gentleman to the requirements of MAA RA4813(3) and CAE4000 - MAP-01 Chapter 7.6.

"Retain for the life of the individual aircraft or equipment in MOD service, plus 5 years"

EnigmAviation

15th Mar 2016, 16:28

Milts613

15th Mar 2016, 17:46

I flew a Vigilant for 20 years. Sure as eggs are eggs, I'll try and buy one. I bet I could get it flying again and it will have a happy retirement with me.

Frelon

15th Mar 2016, 18:45

Put me down for one!! :=:=:= Not too worried about the missing paperwork

Thorr

15th Mar 2016, 21:05

I could see the mod breaking the vigilants up to avoid the awkward situation of private operators having them flying in relatively short order.

kestrel539

15th Mar 2016, 21:12

Frelon,
I would be very worried if there is no proof that the 3000 hr inspection
has been done; north of £6k given the work involved.

Frelon

15th Mar 2016, 22:23

Kestrel, you obviously missed the fact that my tongue was in my cheek :D

However, I expect that they will be attractive to somebody out there :ok:

cats_five

16th Mar 2016, 04:50

Sky Sports

16th Mar 2016, 05:05

Getting any of the vigilante flying in private hands means the exact same work needs doing, plus it would need transitioning to the g register. Everyone in the gliding world now knows about their lack of documentation, so they will need exactly the same minute inspection

Yes, and any club or individual out there wanting one will just crack on with it.

What they won't do is have endless meetings, form committees, working parties or 'recovery teams', throw hundeds of thousands at it, make promises and instantly break them, say they are working 24/7 on it when in reality they are sitting on their hands and arses, and generally do bugger all for 2 years !!!!

Sky Sports

16th Mar 2016, 05:19

Earlier on in the thread, around the post #790, I made the comment that I had seen cadet numbers fall as a result of the 'pause'. This was debate and the comment challenged in some quarters.

Glad this was confirmed in the recent RAF briefing note.

Pause. In Apr 14 substantial airworthiness issues became apparent on both Viking and Vigilant gliders. A fleet check led to a total loss of airworthiness assurance and all glider flying was paused until the scale of the problem could be determined and a recovery plan put into action. As this was being developed more technical failings emerged, which led to a comprehensive overhaul of the whole gliding enterprise; a refresh from origin of every aircraft’s airworthiness certificate and a re-baseline of all maintenance records. A parallel root and branch review of activity led to a redefining of why we glide, how it is organized and controlled, where it happens and how it is managed. This lengthy and unavoidable pause, was acutely felt and resulted in a reduction in cadet numbers and a dispirited adult volunteer cadre.

I should also like to add, that it will go on being 'acutely felt' and will continue to see cadet numbers fall.

There are some who have been hanging on, hoping to see a full return to flying with lots of opportunities to get airborne. Now that is not going to happen, they to will leave.

Additionally, there are those who fall for the, 'so many opportunities to fly', li(n)e at open evenings, who then sign up, realise the truth and quit within a couple of months.

Its my guess that squadrons will be closing all over NI and Wales.

POBJOY

16th Mar 2016, 08:17

Sky Sports
I agree; it is time that it was accepted that the ATC Gliding movement has been destroyed and both the Cadets and volunteer staff badly let down.

That the RAF allowed this to happen is a disgrace, and also the reason why those in charge should never be given the chance to oversee another 'reborn' system.

Without capable leadership and strong technical back up the organisation will never be able to repair the self inflicted damage.

However there are hundreds of capable and easily re-qualified adult instructors out there who could provide the backbone of a Gliding service not burdened by the lack of competence from the present clueless staff at the top.

The CO''s of schools that are going or have no future should seek to take the 7 decades of ability and capable operations to another organisation so the future youth can experience the unique opportunity of being part of a system that allows them to build confidence and make decisions.Gliding is a wonderful element in learning about decision making and the lessons learnt in youth are well repaid in later life. The way ahead for the 'lost' units is to grasp the facts and decide if they want to use all that experience to build for the future,rather than let it wither away. They could do worse than 'affiliate' with the GSA movement under the BGA to provide a youth 'feeder' training input that the Clubs can then build on. Nothing to loose as what you have now is lost and/or is run by complete incompetence and is going nowhere fast.

Mushroom club

16th Mar 2016, 08:44

I think that the RAF may be realising that the VGSs may not go quietly after all. I hope there will be backlash against the "relaunch". The way the VGS staff have been treated is appalling. Of course change may be inevitable but the lack of anything resembling leadership does no credit to the wider RAF/MOD and no disrespect to those of you who are serving or have done so.

The VGSs have given countless military aircrew, not to mention assorted commissioned and ground trades, their love of aviation and a desire to serve. They deserve much better than this.

Mushers

Bill Macgillivray

16th Mar 2016, 09:37

Signed, Bill.

POBJOY

16th Mar 2016, 10:33

Mushroom; the VGS have lost 3 (THREE) Easter Course's and yet i see no real
evidence that it caused any backlash.
Because of its 'military' background the chance of a 'shareholders revolt' is not likely nor the way things are done.
The best way to show your disgust is to remove yourself from the broken system and take the experience somewhere else.Why wait for a system led by useless no-hopers to do a turn-around;its not going to happen,it never does.
You are up against people who think politically and are not do-ers,plus you need hands on aviation staff, not refugees from the LAST CHANCE HOTEL !!!! No disrespect to refugees.Throw off the schackles of dead beats digging bigger graves and rise up to the challenge of doing what you know best for the future of the potential air minded youth.

Arclite01

16th Mar 2016, 16:31

Current count signatures #11,896

so over the first hurdle of 10,000

Arc

kestrel539

16th Mar 2016, 16:53

Just trying to keep the second hand value of my G109 up...:)

squawking 7700

16th Mar 2016, 17:58

Out of interest, how many first solos were there in the VGS' last full year of operation? are those stats available?

7700

ATFQ

16th Mar 2016, 19:50

Squawking 7700,

The Air Cadets achieved 1386 1st solos in 2011.

The Olympics in 2012 skewed figures (some VGSs were temporarily closed over the summer) and I don't have the figure for 2013. Someone else might though.

The target for 2014 (pre-grounding) was for 2077 Gliding Scholarships, not all of which would have resulted in 1st solos (Silver Wings). The 'hit rate' is typically around 75-80%.

mary meagher

16th Mar 2016, 21:00

Any ATC instructors out there are welcome to transfer their experience and knowlege to their local civilian gliding club. And we are happy when the youngsters turn up as well.

Just check on the British Gliding Association website, we wear aircraft and parachutes, not uniforms.

Corporal Clott

16th Mar 2016, 23:02

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/minister-visits-raf-cadets-and-volunteers-in-scotland

All aboard the outrage bus...:mad::mad::mad:

Corporal Clott

16th Mar 2016, 23:05

I believe that Cadet numbers fell by ~4,000 due to the Grob Tutor prop problem, then the harness issue and then the glider issues - however this drop would have been even worse if the Year 8 kids hadn't been allowed to join at an earlier age!

So I think you can safely say that over 1 in 10 have left due to a loss of flying opportunities...:{

A sad endictment for the 75th Anniversary Year of the Air Cadets

CPL Clott

DC10RealMan

16th Mar 2016, 23:27

My local Aero Club is also very supportive of the Air Cadets and do everything in their power to make them welcome in uniform or not.

Subsunk

17th Mar 2016, 04:53

Signed. For sanity's sake, I'm glad I've not hung around the VGS for the last couple of years and just cracked on with civvy flying instead. I'll hand my kit in and crack on with my hours build. My old VGS is one of the surviving units, but this debacle shows exactly what loyal, long-serving volunteers can expect from an organisation that is as spiteful as it is clueless.

For the last 2 years, the ATC has made its staff and cadets choose between either flying or the ATC - you can't have both. What kind of air-mindedness are we trying to foster here?

My thoughts go out to those regions that have lost their VGS - whether Vigi or Viking, these were priceless national assets that showed the aviation community at its very best.

As for JM, I'm actually starting to develop a grudging respect for him. Downing 5 aircraft makes you an ace, and he's got far more kills than that after this whole admin carnival. Shame they all have RAF roundels on their fuselages.

DC10RealMan

17th Mar 2016, 09:05

He has not finished yet!

Arclite01

17th Mar 2016, 09:47

Subsunk

Apparently the new phrase is 'Gliding Centres of Excellence' (GCOE)- if you look at the link in Cpl Clott's post at #1861

I thought that was what the VGS already were...............

My experience of COE in my day job is that they are just Management Speak for reduced capability....................

Arc

Frelon

17th Mar 2016, 10:13

All gliding clubs would welcome Air Cadets, except they would have to deny any relationship between joining the club and being in the Air Cadets!!

It would have been much less expensive (than this debacle) if HQAC/ACO had made money available to offer suitably qualified (and enthusiastic) cadets the opportunities to fly with either the GSA or BGA gliding clubs, rather akin to Flying Scholarships (from which I benefited many years ago). Having said that the hoops that the clubs would have to jump through are getting bigger and more frequent :ugh::ugh:

The clubs are lacking these youngsters and whilst many offer special rates to their juniors it is the current youth element that will help drive the clubs in the future.

JM you should be ashamed of what you have achieved :mad: as there appears to have been no attempts at a quick workaround despite your many promises of working 24/7 to solve the issue.

Three serviceable airframes in two years!! The Chinese would have carved 70 airframes out of solid GRP in this time :ugh:

BEagle

17th Mar 2016, 10:25

The Unique Selling Point of the air cadet organisation is (or used to be) that it offers youngsters the opportunity to learn to fly gliders at their local gliding site.

'Regional Centres of Excellence', gliding 'simulators', 'cyber courses', 'battle management courses' etc. are hardly going to be of much interest to youngsters who simply want to learn to fly a glider and get a taste of service life..... Or to their parents?

Out of interest, has anyone been told what the actual cost of recovery to the pre-2014 state would have been?

POBJOY

17th Mar 2016, 10:32

The best way to show 'solidarity' and make a point is to take your expertise elsewhere (or 'regroup' out of the ATC) thereby leaving JM and his band of nit wits nothing to command or C........U....
Now that would get noticed for a 75th event.

Frelon

17th Mar 2016, 10:34

Beags

offers youngsters the opportunity to learn to fly gliders at their local gliding site
......could still happen if anybody at HQAC/ACO/FTS is allowed to think outside the box. See above for local gliding clubs.

gliding 'simulators are now called Part Task Trainers - what wankspeak is that??

cats_five

17th Mar 2016, 13:46

The Unique Selling Point of the air cadet organisation is (or used to be) that it offers youngsters the opportunity to learn to fly gliders at their local gliding site.

Isn't that what a BGA club offers?

Arclite01

17th Mar 2016, 15:34

Cats

For free ??

That is the whole point. The Air Cadet movement is all inclusive..............money doesn't come into it...................or social class for that matter.

Arc

RUCAWO

17th Mar 2016, 15:46

Cats

Gliding clubs don't offer in addition to gliding ,camps at RAF stations, overseas camps, marksmanship, first aid training, DoE ,flying scholarships etc all in the one place .

Mechta

17th Mar 2016, 15:57

It would have been much less expensive (than this debacle) if HQAC/ACO had made money available to offer suitably qualified (and enthusiastic) cadets the opportunities to fly with either the GSA or BGA gliding clubs, rather akin to Flying Scholarships (from which I benefited many years ago). Having said that the hoops that the clubs would have to jump through are getting bigger and more frequent

There have been quite a few Air Cadets flying on ACO sponsored schemes in our RAFGSA club, as well as a good number who are self-funding. On the whole they have been a breath of fresh air to the club, showing quite extraordinary levels of determination and enthusiasm. One cadet last year had a 2 1/2 hour journey each way by underground and a couple of trains, and another drives a 200 mile round trip. The sad part is that as the cadets are responsible for getting themselves to the club, the most disadvantaged ones miss out.

ATFQ

17th Mar 2016, 16:12

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124333

Come on everyone. If you haven't already done so then please sign up to the petition at the link, and please also encourage all of your friends and family to do the same. We've got one chance to rescue this, to give the air cadets of tomorrow, regardless of their background, the same opportunity that we all had. A debate in Parliament needs 100,000 signatories. This is well within reach if we all do our bit. Let's not throw the chance away.

CoffmanStarter

17th Mar 2016, 17:56

Many years ago my primary motivation to join the Air Cadets, as a young lad, was for the flying ... which I would suggest was the primary driver for most of us back then. Based on what I have read on this thread ... I now consider myself very fortunate indeed in gaining the experience, confidence and personal responsibility that came as a direct result of chasing after every opportunity to fly ... some of which was as a result of extramural initiative on my behalf.

Given what has been said here over some 94 Pages/1,900 Posts (and you can't all be wrong) it seems that 2FTS should take a careful look at what CAS launched today ...

Start talking to each other more in person; then we'll better appreciate the different things we all offer.

Be open-minded and receptive. Make room for imagination, creativity and innovation. Promote diverse thinking and encourage innovation from others. A good challenge should be met with a good response.

Good leadership can also be inspired by good ideas.

Quote : RAF CAS

... as it would seem that such an approach has been missing over the last two years in arriving at a High Performance Solution to the Air Cadet Gliding issue.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafiles/28DBDA58_5056_A318_A8AA043B147E9F02.pdf

Petition signed.

Frelon

17th Mar 2016, 18:00

As a 16 year old living in south London neither I nor my parents could afford for me to follow my dream of gliding. Fortunately I was in the ATC Squadron of my Grammar school, and that allowed me to get my A & B at Hawkinge followed up by Advanced Gliding and Flying Scholarship (full PPL in those days). I went on many summer camps and a number of courses which were held at RAF Halton. I also won a reciprocal visit to Portugal as a guest of the Portuguese Air Force. All of this at the cost of a shilling per day for food!! Oh how things have changed!!
However the cadets of today have had the flying/gliding rug well and truly pulled from under their feet. I feel sure that there are some highly enthusiatic cadets out there who deserve to be awarded a gliding scholarship some time in the next two years without waiting for the Minister's promises to be fulfilled. The clubs are waiting for these enthusiastic youngsters and could (with the right funding from the ACO) fulfill their dreams too.
I feel sure that a debate in the right place could bring this funding sooner rather than later.
Get that petition signed👍👍

cats_five

17th Mar 2016, 18:07

Our Cadets pay very little to fly. £90 pa for membership, and £8 for a winch launch and up to 30 minutes flying - a winch launch alone would cost me £8.50. It's true we don't offer all the other activities, but our cadets seem very happy spending a day on the airfield. They get very good at making sure they don't go beyond 30 minutes as it then starts costing 46p / minute, though the counting stops at somewhere a bit over 2 hours. I enjoyed flying 'for free' when I did my Silver duration, plus a few other enjoyable flights.

Like nearly all gliding clubs (and I suspect the ATC sites) public transport to the site is very poor, and that on it's own limits who can participate.

pulse1

17th Mar 2016, 18:20

The Unique Selling Point of the air cadet organisation is (or used to be) that it offers youngsters the opportunity to learn to fly gliders at their local gliding site.

This used to be so true that, in my long gone days instructing with 622, they introduced the course to enable younger cadets to do 30 launches when they were too young to solo. I was told that this was to help retain the cadets. If it was true then it is surely still true.

The B Word

17th Mar 2016, 20:49

Coff

That would be the same 4* that selected the current VGS option out of 7 outcomes as the one to put forward to the Minister then? I don't think singling out one individual (already named) for this travesty is fair - there are a whole bunch of them with various agendas that have 'allowed' this to happen.

Personally, I think that this will be the perfect example of a failing organisation when historians look back on HMForces in years to come. Lucklustre leadership, parochial visions, political subservience, planning in isolation, wasted money and risk aversion will all feature in a report in years to come.

Or maybe we have just seen this all before and history is still repeating itself? :}

The B Word

BEagle

17th Mar 2016, 20:50

A part task trainer is utterly useless for teaching people to fly as it has very limited visual, no motion nor any control force feedback. How do you teach 'select, hold, trim' in something with no control forces or motion?

PTTs are fine for teaching / practising procedures and the like, but that thing in Scotland shown in Corporal Clott's link will probably lead to negative teaching.

Quite a pretty toy, but those of us who've ever taught students whose previous experience has been on MSFS and the like know full well how difficult it is to correct bad habits introduced by computer games.

DC10RealMan

17th Mar 2016, 22:21

"Be open minded and receptive" "Promote diverse thinking" "Encourage innovation"

I presume he has never met JM.

Mechta

17th Mar 2016, 23:30

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124333

Come on everyone. If you haven't already done so then please sign up to the petition at the link, and please also encourage all of your friends and family to do the same.

ATFQ, I've just got off the phone to Mechta Senior as I had sent him a link to sign the petition. He was an Air Cadet in 1944/45, and the similarities and differences with the current situation are worth a mention.

He had to qualify on his squadron to get the opportunity to fly, although he can't remember how.
His Air Cadet squadron provided him with a rail warrant to get from Chichester to Portsmouth on a Friday evening, where he would spend the weekend in a Nissen hut on the airfield.
The Air Cadet gliders (Kirby Cadets) had structural issues (spar problems?), so a lot of the air cadet flying was actually done on the Portsmouth Gliding Club gliders (BAC 7 & Dagling).
The winch was a converted balloon winch.
The retrieve vehicles were Beaverette armoured cars which had had the armour flame cut off to leave a sort of spaceframe (and some rather jagged skin-removing edges).
The chief instructor was Airspeed's test pilot, Ron Clear, whilst Frank Costin, later of Marcos Cars fame, was one of the other instructors.
Once a cadet had completed a thirty second flight, his training and support from his squadron would cease, hence there were a very large number of twenty eight and twenty nine second flights ;-) .
A lot of cadets went on to join the Portsmouth club so they could carry on flying.
Sharing an airfield with the Airspeed factory meant that the club and Air Cadet gliders were kept supplied with parts.
No one from Air Cadet headquarters ever came to see how things were run.
.

Clearly, then as now in the 'pause', the air cadet organisation was reliant on the goodwill of civilian clubs to function.

Mandator

18th Mar 2016, 00:03

..... and then Cosworth?

Mechta

18th Mar 2016, 00:09

Mandator, Cosworth was Frank's brother, Mike; although according to Wikipedia, Frank did design an ultralight glider with the other half of Cosworth, Keith Duckworth.

CoffmanStarter

18th Mar 2016, 08:23

The B Word

Your 1881 Para 1. I suspect, as in the Corporate World, that if there were seven possible solutions then almost certainly they would have been 'ranked' in order of preference by the solution 'sponsor' ... even more likely a 'recommendation' will have been made for 'endorsement' by the CEO (or CAS in this instance).

I also deliberately implied a 'collective' responsibility by quoting '2FTS' not an individual.

Your 1881 Para 2. Your summary is probably correct.

Bergerie1

18th Mar 2016, 09:06

Apologies if this has been posted before. But we could all help preserve the Air Cadet scheme by signing this petition:-

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124333

1.3VStall

18th Mar 2016, 10:44

See also the Royal Aeronautical Society commentary written yesterday by Howard Wheeldon. I commend it to you!

Keep signing the petition - there must be at least 100,000 aviation-minded people out there who don't wish to see air cadet gliding decimated.

VX275

18th Mar 2016, 11:53

there must be at least 100,000 aviation-minded people out there who don't wish to see air cadet gliding decimated
If only it had been decimated, its been more than halved.

DaveUnwin

18th Mar 2016, 12:04

Hi all, the Editor of Pilot magazine has asked me to revisit this particular scandal (for scandal it surely is) for my monthly PTT column in Pilot. I'd be grateful if any of you could tell me how many VSOs, OC BBMFs, Red Ones etc to your knowledge started out in the ATC. PMs are OK. I have a FoI request in, but am not holding my breath....
Incidentally, I know someone who is in the ATC, and they recieved a snottergram via email instructing them to 'cease and desist' promulgating the petition via social media. Just thought I'd share that little bit of info on er social media! And if you haven't yet signed the petition, why not? This debacle (for debacle it also surely is) does need bringing to the attention of parliament.

Wander00

18th Mar 2016, 12:42

Dave, I am pretty sure that Cranwell keeps a record of cadets entering who are former Air Cadets. Fifty years ago well over half my Cranwell cadet entry were former ATC/CCF. Good luck, I look forward to seeing the article.

tmmorris

18th Mar 2016, 12:44

Dave don't forget the CCF RAF too, the VGS are often seen as part of the ATC but they support us too. Many CCF cadets have similarly had their first solo in a VGS glider.

Wander00

18th Mar 2016, 12:57

CCF gave me a wonderful time, spent most weekends at an RAF station, Navy base or with the Army. Saw the Ceremony of the Keys at the Tower of London twice, both on foggy November nights - spooky. Also saw the SRN-1 on test in the Solent. They also helped me get a Flying Scholarship, and paid most of my Outward Bound course. ATC got me my gliding A&B as well.

CoffmanStarter

18th Mar 2016, 14:21

Dave ...

This might help you a little with civilian celebrities.

Air Cadets - Famous Cadets (http://www.raf.mod.uk/aircadets/whoweare/famouscadets.cfm)

Information Source : RAF MOD Air Cadet Organisation

One presumes HQAC secured the necessary permissions to publish such information ... But I'm unable to confirm that.

Wander00

18th Mar 2016, 15:52

AAh, fame by association - Sir Paul Nurse and I were in the same school CCF

BEagle

18th Mar 2016, 16:15

One wonders whether those organisations, which made such a fuss about the CAA's review of air display requirements, will be equally vociferous about the future of air-minded youth in the UK?

Which matters more - some public entertainment event or the UK's future pilots?

I would venture the latter...

As for 'cease and desist' gagging orders being sent to ACO members, that's a clear acknowledgement of failed leadership....

Wander00

18th Mar 2016, 16:43

Are they trying to gag cadets or staff, uniformed or otherwise?

mmitch

18th Mar 2016, 16:53

I see the ATC website says that cadets 'may get the opportunity to fly in RAF Hercules, VC10s and Tristars.' Well they got one right.
mmitch.

Four Turbo

18th Mar 2016, 17:00

OK, petition signed. As a cadet who got a Flying Scholarship (Tiger Moths at Croydon), Gliding 'C' (in a T21!) and an Air Cadet Exchange (across Canada to Victoria) in the 50s I was very lucky. They did then get 34 years of flying out of me, so it probably paid off. Aviation wise I flew from 16 to 65, with many happy memories. So sad and sorry to see the lack of these opportunities today. Any more I can do to help?

brokenlink

18th Mar 2016, 17:41

Wander - Uniformed staff have to be officially neutral in the execution of their duties as you will appreciate. What parents and other family members do whilst they are online is of course entirely up to them.

clunckdriver

18th Mar 2016, 18:16

The B Word

18th Mar 2016, 18:23

Hi Coff

Please accept my apologies. Having reread my post I can see how it will have read - when I mentioned singling out an indivdiual, that was not pointed at you, but the wider gang of Pruners who seem intent in mentioning one of the lead individuals by name (at Leeming in the late 90s early noughties the mere mention of that name would invoke a round of drinks in the bar amongst the Air Defenders!).

I do think that plenty of senior officers have put their own agendas into the mix with this outrageous decision and that it does not boil down to one man. Don't forget that the original plan was supposedly kicked back by the RAF senior leaders in November as it allegedly did not fit with their own plans. This is the plan that the senior leaders chose second time around and, as I understand it, was far more Grob Tutor rich than the first that had more gliders. So, I think this is also bad timing in that Grob Tutors become available off of the back of MFTS in 2017 and that little fact has been gripped by a Tutor fan (or fans) over the purchase of some more gliders. Maybe they know far more than they're letting on, but replacing cheap to operate gliders for expensive Tutors (with the ridiculous amount of Air Traffic Control and Fire Cover they insist they need) just doesn't make financial sense. That's my theory, anyway! :ok:

B Word

CoffmanStarter

18th Mar 2016, 18:54

No need to apologise, B Word, old chap ... all perfectly good here ;)

Having worked at a senior level in the Corporate World, based in the City, the 'machinations' on display here come as no personal surprise. The only people that are going to miss out here are the youngsters of today and those that might want to join in the future ... and that is unforgivable in my book.

UK Plc needs future generations following in our footsteps ... Not only to become pilots/aircrew but also aero-engineers, technicians, designers and other related skilled careers ... the opportunity to experience the thrill of flying (going solo) at an early age is most certainly a key catalyst in achieving this aim.

The next episode ... 'Who will fly the AEF Tutor' is going to be interesting :suspect:

Best ...

Coff.

RUCAWO

18th Mar 2016, 19:04

Just got word today that one of my former cadets, who achieved his Gold Wings at the now disbanded 664VGS has been accepted for pilot training by Virgin Atlantic, another to add to the success list for the VGS !

Cat Funt

18th Mar 2016, 19:47

I'm surprised about the level of hand-wringing going on amongst volunteers over whether or not to sign the petition. Sure, some are subject to QRs but, in reality, what are the powers at be going to do? Dismiss you from your unpaid position when there's already a chronic shortage of people to do the jobs that need doing? Are they really going to start to court-martial civilians in blue suits for highlighting the blindingly obvious? I'd love to see how that plays out in the national media. From what I can glean, you can probably count without taking off your socks the number of people from the disbanded squadrons who would still give "Pippa" Middleton, ACdre Fluffy-bunny and the RAF in general so much as the steam off their piss after all this.

If it's something you care about, ladies and gents, sign bloody thing. If you don't care or disagree with it don't. It probably won't change anything because the sqns are already being told to get everything packed up and shipped to parent units in the next week or so. Just do yourselves a favour when it comes to looking at yourselves in the mirror and show a little bit more integrity than the f**kwits who foisted this on everyone.

mary meagher

18th Mar 2016, 20:17

Cat F, restrain yourself; bad language wins no friends.

* * * * * * * *

At our gliding club, we are sponsoring 3 lads who should be flying with Air Cadets, they fly with us instead, and two are solo already.

Did all you guys realise that now we can send them solo at the age of 14? We are very proud of them, and think it a poor show that the RAF can't sponsor a flying programme with all that real estate and equipment available.

I suggest they shut down the Trident and spend the money on aviation. Who do we think we are deterring when our chief enemies are suicide bombers and the Ruskys, Germans, and Japanese are allies.

I hold a British and an American passport, and have signed the petition.

ATFQ

18th Mar 2016, 21:15

I probably sound like a stuck record, but everyone should and can sign. We owe it to ourselves and the next generation of air cadets. We live in a free society.

The Government wants to put 'the next generation first'. This is about helping them. It is unusual to be court-martialled for supporting the Government position.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124333

Cat Funt

18th Mar 2016, 21:51

That's great, Mary, but those cadets are probably being paid for by the bank of mum and dad. I understand there are some training bursaries out there, but they simply can't hope to replace the scale of what the air cadets once did.

If we pull out the maps of where the planned sites will be, we will notice hoofing great holes in the poorest areas of the U.K. One sqn in Scotland (Assuming they can make the airfield operable.) nothing in Wales, nothing in NI and, once the last of the Vigilants go from Topcliffe and Woodvale, nothing North of Syerston in Nottinghamshire until you reach Kirknewton. If you live in places like the Home Counties and the Cotswolds, then it's damn close to business as usual.

What truly beggars belief are the figures I've heard thrown around concerning the amount of money that will be required to upgrade these sites so they can operate Vikings safely. And please bear in mind, that all of these places are backwaters as far as the wider MoD is concerned. Millions are being spent to upgrade places like Little Riss and Upavon when it could be spend on aircraft. To be sure, the Viking operation is perhaps a more inclusive affair for day visitors doing Fam/GIC but as a TRAINING platform, the vigilant was far more flexible in terms of its ability to deploy elsewhere, the ability to integrate with other airfield users, the smaller amount of support equipment it needed and far fewer people required to operate them. There was a very good reason why there has always been a gaggle of de-rigged Vikings at Syerston- they ran out of places to put them. What's more, the Vigliant was never used it to its full potential. For example, for the cost of installing a GMC or even just a directional gyro, it could have been used to teach nav courses in addition to ab initio training.

I firmly believe that the solution put forward was Middleton's plan from the beginning. It wasn't a secret that he was opposed to volunteer non-QSPs flying powered aircraft while he was RC North. I've been in the room with him when he said he didn't understand the need for Vigilant and Tutor for AEF and UAS (albeit this was while the Tutor was grounded so he seemed to imply that the Vigilant could perhaps be used for both- as was being mooted elsewhere.) VSOs and ministers don't make up policy in a vacuum. Unless it's something of central importance to them, they'll tend to choose the path of least resistance and pick what ever has been dressed up to be the most palatable by the "sponsor", as has already been discussed.

Instead, the ACO has committed to the far more expensive Tutor to provide powered flying. And all it will do is put bums in the air instead of providing TRAINING. I can't wait to find out where 6FTS intend to find pilots for these larger and more numerous AEFs since most of them already have quite severe manning problems, the RAF is getting ever smaller and EASA regs are putting more pressure on volunteer QSPs who now fly in the commercial sector.

I think most people who understand the Air Cadets- which sadly doesn't include the bevy of FTRS has-beens in the White House at Cranwell- also understand that this is yet another blow from which they will not recover. Cadet numbers will continue to fall as they realise that the ACO offers little more than a myriad of other organisation do. Volunteers will see how badly even the most committed amongst them will be treated and also vote with their feet. They will continue to see that their parent service continues to let them down as support dwindles, timelines slip, admin burdens increase along with pressure to provide a "light blue footprint" at one dog and pony show after another, which accomplish little but to further detract from the things the kids joined up to do.

Wander00

18th Mar 2016, 22:52

BL - I agree, but not having seen the dictat, I was wondering if they were trying to muzzle other than "staff". I assume from your post that is not the case

ATFQ

18th Mar 2016, 23:53

facebook link for those who haven't seen it.

https://www.facebook.com/UKACOGliding/?pnref=story

Bergerie1

19th Mar 2016, 07:33

I have just placed a post in Rumour & News urging more people to sign the petition. I have done so, even though this thread here is covering the issue in great detail, because not everyone reads about military aviation and we need many more signatures on this petition.

DaveUnwin

19th Mar 2016, 09:53

Hi All, just a quick 'Thanks a bunch' for all the PMs - some interesting facts and some fascinating figures! I think 4Turbo has already made the point I was trying to though - if they got 34 years out of him then the investment was well and truly returned - in spades. And we all know there's many like him. Thanks once again.

biscuit74

19th Mar 2016, 12:27

Cat Funt - I did like your " wouldn't give the steam off their p*** " comment, notwithstanding Mary's disapproval. Had me guffawing - a fine example of minimalist thinking.
On your next post, like you it amazes me how much the RAF or MOD appears
happy to spend uselessly.

Sky Sports

19th Mar 2016, 12:49

My lad gave up with with the Air Cadets as an avenue to fly this time last year. We had a talk and decided that staying in the air cadets would be a good idea solely for the purposes of a CV. But, if he really wanted to fly as a career, then joining the local gliding club concurrently would be a good move.

Consider this. He has been a member for exactly one year and has chalked up 60 flights. He is charged £3.50 per launch and all air time is free. Had he not done this, it will take him 30 years in the 'Air' Cadets to get to the same stage!

30 years experience for £210. 'No brainer' as they say!

Corporal Clott

19th Mar 2016, 13:11

There is no way that pressure can be applied to an individual to not voice their concerns via a petition. As long as you do not use your rank or in-Service status and sign it as Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms then there is absolutely no issue at all. It is a basic right of every citizen (civilian or military) to be able to voice their opinion in the UK - it's just that those of us who wear HM's uniform must not overtly criticise the Govt whilst wearing said uniform or acting in a Service capacity. Whilst off duty, in the comfort of one's own home, the same individual is able to voice personal opinions as much as they like (like signing a petition).

Think about it, if you were not able to voice a personal political preference then you wouldn't be able to vote!

Facebook is subtly different as many persons put pictures of themsleves in Viggis/Vikings - then if you criticise then their is the faintest argument that you are bending the rules. But for a petition there is no such danger as long as no reference is made of your status (ie. Rank or connection to the Service)

CPL Clott

iRaven

19th Mar 2016, 13:26

If you want a conspiracy theory, the 2016 decision was stitched together as early as 2012:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/207647/response/532404/attach/4/20140623%20FOI%2001063%20ACO%20Flying%20Glider%20Study%20O.p df

:*

romeo bravo

19th Mar 2016, 16:26

Well its hit the Torygraph

Air cadet cuts will see more than half of squadrons axed - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12198890/Air-cadet-cuts-will-see-more-than-half-of-squadrons-axed.html)

CoffmanStarter

19th Mar 2016, 16:48

Generally a good piece but missed the key point that youngsters had the opportunity to fly 'solo' in a glider ... Which is more than just gaining 'flying experience' even if the proposed expansion of the Tutor AEF fleet is achievable ... It's more than just 'airframe' numbers ... Cadets won't be going 'solo' in a Tutor.

POBJOY

19th Mar 2016, 18:28

Romeo Bravo
This is a great opportunity to get the real facts out there by us writing (e-mail) to the Defence Correspondent and appraising him of what has really happened to the ATC,and exposing the lies that are now emanating from Sleasford / Suspecston and MOD.
As this is the Defence column and the TG it will get read by many more than a tabloid journo plug.
Just the simple facts will do;and if enough do it we will get far more exposure on the sublect.
Remember;what the nit wits hate is a PR black hole,and all we have to do is to state the FACTS.

ZFT

20th Mar 2016, 00:01

As an ex Air Cadet, {450 Sqdn and 143 Gliding school} I'm a bit ticked of that I am not allowed to sign the petition, I think with the mass migration from the UK in the late forties and early fifties the are many of us in the same boat. Clunck,{RCAF pilot retired}

Where does it exclude ex ATC Cadets from signing the petition? I've signed it and so pleased to have been ex 14F Sqdn. Changed me forever, defined my career, and sent me on my 1st solo in a Sedburgh.

CoffmanStarter

20th Mar 2016, 09:56

To those in the know ...

There are many of us here on PPRuNe who aren't FBook 'Users/Members'. It would be good to know when the dedicated 'Save The VGS Campaign Website' will go live ... so we can help 'cascade' the message :ok:

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/Screen%20Shot%202016-03-20%20at%2008.50.30_zpsdylpim4g.png

Thanks ...

Coff.

Lima Juliet

20th Mar 2016, 10:41

Daily Mail now - Young pilots grounded as Air Cadets halve their flying volunteer glider squadrons | Daily Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3500365/Young-pilots-grounded-Air-Cadets-halve-flying-volunteer-glider-squadrons.html)

clunckdriver

20th Mar 2016, 12:09

Zet, it doesn't say ex Air Cadets cant sign the petition, but it does say one has to be resident or citizen of the UK, which looking out the window a ten foot snow banks I don't think I fit that description! {God was only joking when he made Canada!}

TheChitterneFlyer

20th Mar 2016, 12:56

If you want a conspiracy theory, the 2016 decision was stitched together as early as 2012:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...0Study%20O.pdf (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/207647/response/532404/attach/4/20140623%20FOI%2001063%20ACO%20Flying%20Glider%20Study%20O.p df) (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...0Study%20O.pdf[/QUOTE)[/URL][URL="https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...0Study%20O.pdf[/QUOTE"] (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...0Study%20O.pdf[/QUOTE)

Can't help but notice that the security caveat within the above document is "RESTRICTED - COMMERCIAL"... a brave post!

iRaven

20th Mar 2016, 13:06

CF

Nothing brave at all. This is a redacted FOI version hence the web address of "whatdotheyknow.com".

From this FOI it still looks like it was almost a pre-decided conclusion back in 2012! :eek:

iRaven :ok:

cats_five

20th Mar 2016, 15:24

Yes, and any club or individual out there wanting one will just crack on with it.

What they won't do is have endless meetings, form committees, working parties or 'recovery teams', throw hundeds of thousands at it, make promises and instantly break them, say they are working 24/7 on it when in reality they are sitting on their hands and arses, and generally do bugger all for 2 years !!!!

If you are dealing with one glider then no, you can just get on with it, but dealing with over 70? There HAS to be a plan, and plans don't materialise out of thing air. I'm not saying the planning process didn't leave a lot of be desired but there undoubtedly has to be one so there equally undoubtedly has to be a process to create it.

ShyTorque

20th Mar 2016, 15:32

Just spoke to my daughter, who left the ATC last year when she reached the age of 18 and was off to Uni. She only got the chance to fly once in four years (even though she became the unit's senior cadet before leaving and represented the ATC at sports). I told her about this news.

She just said: They should re-name the Air Cadets just ..."Cadets!"

Airbus38

20th Mar 2016, 16:26

In addition to the tragic losses inflicted on the organisation, as others have alluded to the introduction of the 'simulators' is an area which I strongly feel we should be concerned about.

Firstly, they were brought in under a cloud of suggestions that a certain (deliberately nameless) person within the organisation had very strong links with the sims' manufacturer. I couldn't possibly comment, but this does seem to be some sort of 'open secret'...

More importantly, the role which they now seem set to play is almost certain to create a dangerous and toxic situation for any aspiring pilot who comes in to contact with them. Until now, they have been referred to in official terms as 'Part-Task Trainers (PTTs)'; this presumably is so that nobody would make the mistake of thinking that these were anything other than a limited-value training aid. It appears now that given the text of the parliamentary update and internal briefing note these PTTs are set to become a key part of future VGS training.

Now first of all, it can't have slipped people's attention that the thousands of pounds of the Charitable Trust's money spent on Vigilant PTTs will have been completely wasted (even if you happen to be in the camp which believes these things were a good idea in the first place). No Cadets have been trained on Vigilants since their introduction; to my knowledge so far no instructors outside of CGS have been given the opportunity to regain instructional categories. Given the likely recovery timescales (to include bringing aircraft back to flying status, requalifying crew and finally bringing Squadrons back to operational status) it looks extremely doubtful that by the 2019 retirement date that much meaningful Cadet training will have been done on Vigilant aircraft. I suppose we can just add the charity money wasted by whoever made the procurement decision on to all the rest of the catastrophic financial decisions throughout this debacle.

In terms of the devices themselves, they leave an awful lot to be desired. In the interest of balance, it's perhaps important to say that I've not had the pleasure of the Viking PTT and therefore this relates to the Vigilant from somebody experienced on type and also experienced in instruction on other types (from light aircraft to turbine) including significant simulator training in various FSTDs/FNPTs/FFSs. I would be interested in hearing the thoughts of others and also some feedback from the Viking fraternity. The major failings are:

- These devices are wholly inappropriate to the task: Ab-initio visual flying training CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be taught in a synthetic training device (particularly a low-grade one) for a whole host of reasons; not least because this task requires mechanical sympathy, control feedback, full appreciation of aircraft trimming, full outside visual reference and a strong emphasis on LOOKOUT.

- They do not accurately depict the handling characteristics, attitudes or performance of the aircraft: For instance, far less power is required to maintain level flight than for the real aircraft, airbrake use produces far less effect than for real, control co-ordination required significantly off the mark, approximately half rudder deflection required to maintain balance in a 20-30 degree bank turn, no trim change with power application or speed change, trim lever totally ineffective (seems to be decorative), constant control force on all axes at all speeds.

Furthermore, the 'generic' handling characteristics mean that the PTT's behaviour as you move further from S+L flight becomes even less realistic. For instance, you can apply and hold full aft elevator, full rudder and full opposite aileron and you won't even see an incipient spin. Equally, it's possible to perform a fairly low-speed aileron roll at the end of the runway after take-off. A G109 will crash if you try that. Yes, I would agree that these devices are not intended as aerobatic trainers, however if a FSTD is to be used for structured flying training, it must not allow pilots to operate in such a way as would kill them in real life. This is a significant danger.

- Poor/nil replication of important controls: One possible way in which the device could have been put to use would be as an emergency procedures trainer. However, various important controls have been so poorly replicated as to have a negative training value. The feathering handle, for instance, which is used to cause significant drag reduction in case of power-unit failure, in the aircraft requires a firm pull of about 12 inches, before being rotated through 90 degrees. In the PTT, it only needs to be turned through 90 degrees, can be done with thumb and finger, and (incredibly) says 'DO NOT PULL' on it. The carburettor hot air control does not need to be rotated to unlock/lock, and moves out less than half the distance needed for fully hot in the aircraft. The airbrake lever, of which one of the main training points is that it has an over-centre lock and must be positively checked to be locked when not physically being used, is not fitted with any form of lock in the PTT. Not locking in the actual aircraft could result in a serious accident. I've witnessed an incredibly near miss, I'm sure I'm not the only one. I believe this was also the suspected cause of the crash at Henlow a few years ago which was a very lucky escape.

These are just a sample of the device's shortcomings, however the possible consequences of training low-time students with such fundemental elements lacking could be catastrophic. As yet, I believe a sim training programme has not yet been implemented (although I understand one exists), however I personally am not prepared to partake in any such training as I believe it to be not only of poor value, but also dangerous. I would encourage other VGS personnel to think carefully before becoming involved in this, and if you feel strongly enough to report it through the normal safety reporting channels.

Safe flying,
A38

Mandator

20th Mar 2016, 16:32

With regard to the redundant Vigilants flooding out onto the civil market, I'm not so sure. When faced with a similar situation several years ago, the USAF destroyed its complete fleet of plastic Fireflies rather then let them onto the civil market where people actually knew how to fly them.

The furore over this current Air Cadet situation might just prompt the 'powers that be' to do the same so that any flaw in their thinking about the condition of the aircraft might not be exposed.

CoffmanStarter

20th Mar 2016, 17:16

Nice piece Airbus38 :ok:

But with the greatest respect to the Minister, Julian Brazier (MP for Canterbury and Parliamentary Under Secretary of State Ministry of Defence), I doubt he has sufficient detailed knowledge and/or aeronautical experience (even as a former Shadow Transport Minister responsible for Aviation & Shipping) to have been able to have offered any robust technical 'challenge' to what he was apparently 'briefed' on (which I'm sure will have covered the proposed use of Vigilant PTT's), when visiting RAF Kirknewton recently.

Minister for Reserves, Julian Brazier, has visited RAF Kirknewton to see how RAF Air Cadets and volunteers gain flight experience training.

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/71988_zpsziqgrhdu.jpg

Image Credit : MOD (I appreciate the above is a Viking Sim)

Minister Visits RAF Kirknewton (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/minister-visits-raf-cadets-and-volunteers-in-scotland)

NB. Mr Brazier joined the Territorial Army aged 19 in 1972 and served for 13 years, five of which were with 21 SAS(R). He was awarded the Territorial Decoration in 1993.

glad rag

20th Mar 2016, 17:55

So much for the increase in defence spending when the very bedrock that sustains future RAF recruitment is decimated this way.
AEF flying taught this wee boy from the 60 's slums to look up....

Hangarshuffle

20th Mar 2016, 18:11

It's not and never will be in the Conservative Party's DNA to give deprived kids a pull up. They'd rather send them up an industrial chimney with a brush if it could raise some money, or save some money to keep GB PLC on the road..
SOS for Defence was moaning on ages ago about the amount of MOD golf courses and all the rest of it, several years ago as I recall - so this is part of the slashing of cash/end of a fringe benefit that is deemed not useful.

BTW - How many of you leapt on the outrage bus when the council house bedroom tax kicked in? That gained a few quid as well. Shafted a lot of decent people mind....but only council houses dwellers and who cares about them?
Its salami slicing of cost to the taxpayer/treasury and you/we/us plebs had better get used to it.

POBJOY

20th Mar 2016, 18:27

Does anyone have any idea how much the 'procedure trainers' cost the purchasers !!!

Need to ramp up the info to the press now,whilst they are interested.

Cat Funt

20th Mar 2016, 19:46

Most of us on the sqns have heard the figure £25k apiece thrown around, Pobjoy.

No idea if this is pukka gen though.

And they ARE pants as a training aid and the CGS instructors will invariably tell you as much over a quiet beer. No more useful than the tried and tested cardboard bomber for touch drills.

Lima Juliet

20th Mar 2016, 19:49

£625k for 25 simulators according to this:

?Del Boy? Marks Trust?s £1 Million Moment (http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/archive/del-boy-marks-trusts-1-million-moment-30052014)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quZ7Ha5c2C8

CoffmanStarter

20th Mar 2016, 19:59

Glad Rag ...

You are so right ... Decimation is the most apt description ... :(

Put aside for one moment airframe type and numbers that were available under the previous VGS Organisation, the proposed new VGS 'footprint' seems ridiculous (also see previous posts above on site locations/lack of representation).

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/1820_1584711405181202_5596995055406849536_n_zpsecimnkut.jpg

Image Credit : Save The VGS FBook

Lima Juliet

20th Mar 2016, 20:06

Coff

For completeness the extra AEFs at the following locations will come into play from 2017. I know they don't provide the same capability (ie. Solo flight) but it does paper a bit over the cracks...

http://www.raf.mod.uk/universityairsquadrons/images/uasmap.jpg

Best

LJ

CoffmanStarter

20th Mar 2016, 20:14

Cheers Leon :ok:

I'm not familiar with MAA docs ... I've had a quick look (and still looking) ... But does the MAA 'mandate' min requirements for 'synthetic' training environments ? What involvement would 22 Group have ?

CoffmanStarter

20th Mar 2016, 20:34

Ahh ... Found something !

MAA : RA 2375 - Approval and Use of Flight Simulator Training Devices

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/350180/RA2375.pdf

But I don't see a formal definition of what a PTT is/should be ?

Does anyone know what level of formal 'approval' these PTT's (Viking/Vigilant) have/will have ?

RUCAWO

20th Mar 2016, 20:35

AEF in NI by 2017 ? I think add 2-3 years on that, IF it happens !

POBJOY

20th Mar 2016, 22:35

Have i missed something or has the AEF system been short of Pilots for years.

Thinking back 'many' years to when i was a Cadet i recall we missed an awful lot of 'allocations' due weather and other issues to the point that i never missed something that never seemed to happen.

Cue; hot footing across to 615 to 'help' and actually get airborne,and it was a much better experience as we were 'hands on' with the equipment and then was sat in an aeronautical orange crate and had a amazing 'launch' which i still remember;elbows out in the breeze and an uncluttered view,whilst wearing normal uniform 'sans beret'.

YOU Cretons at HQ ATC and MOD have destroyed something that any Cadet could experience and develop with the system if keen enough. B........s to your Part Task Trainers,Cascading,Face Book,and all that C...p.You are clueless and have no idea of Leadership or leading by example.You have lied to the Cadets,and staff plus treated them with contempt and disdain.You are a disgrace to the organisation that did so much for the ordinary youth,and also to those who provided so much encouragement and real leadership in the Corps developing decades. I am so sorry that the Squadrons that took on the fine traditions and adapted to new equipment have been so appallingly treated to the point of near treachery by the very people that should have been backing them up.In this 75th year let us remember the Squadrons never failed they were failed by those up top.

unmanned_droid

20th Mar 2016, 22:36

Signed, as an ex 633 and 632 stude.

The ATC had no real bearing on my career trajectory - that was set long before I was old enough to join, however, the wealth of knowledge I gained at those two units, on my squadron (2415) and as a staff cadet at 8 AEF, along with the people I kept company with across the age and rank structure positively affected my life then and now - I had an edge all the way though University, and in to my career as a structures engineer in aerospace, specifically because of what I had been exposed to as a cadet, all that stuff you can never learn in books.

I've watched this thread quite closely, and its been a sad time in the history of the Air Training Corps for a whole raft of reasons.

BEagle

21st Mar 2016, 05:24

Airbus 38 wrote:

- These devices are wholly inappropriate to the task: Ab-initio visual flying training CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be taught in a synthetic training device (particularly a low-grade one) for a whole host of reasons; not least because this task requires mechanical sympathy, control feedback, full appreciation of aircraft trimming, full outside visual reference and a strong emphasis on LOOKOUT.

Absolutely. A PTT is only of use for procedure training and should never be used for ab initio visual flight training.

Presumably a Training Needs Analysis was conducted before this grant was made? Or was this yet another case of "Don't bother me with facts"?...:rolleyes:

CoffmanStarter

21st Mar 2016, 08:16

A PTT is only of use for procedure training and should never be used for ab initio visual flight training.

Absolutely right ... Shame, therefore, that the Air Cadet Commandant doesn't seem to appreciate the very important difference :ugh:

I'm 'playing' the issue under debate not the 'personality' ... Skip to 5:00 for reference to PTT's for "Basic Flying Training" and "Simulated Air Experience" (whatever the latter means ?).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4zJe0WBca4

iRaven

21st Mar 2016, 09:03

Like Coffman, I play the facts, not the person. But this was uploaded 3 years ago to YouTube and it shows OC2FTS' "personal" views, when he was a Regional Commandant, on the use of technology and 'quality over quantity'. This would chime with my previous conspiracy theory that today's position has been a long time coming:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjn8lRO3tsM

I don't share the same horrror about using a low-grade flight sim as some on here if it is used for what it is. However at £25k a go, I don't think that is value for money - certainly not 'quality over quantity' in my personal opinion. Three simulators could buy a new glider/motorglider, for instance.

Whilst I don't think that the VGS decision will get reversed, I hope that it will be relooked at (independent review) and a better plan is developed for say 4 years time - they could aim at the planned loss of the Vigilant in 2019. Phoenixes can rise from the ashes if given a chance and the time is now to get some money put aside in future years to pay for this - maybe a partnership with Service Charities is a good thing?

The review I propose must be independent as there appears to be too much personal influence running through the decisions taken of late. A fresh set of eyes to a problem that has dragged for a number of years is normally a good thing!

iRaven

ATFQ

21st Mar 2016, 09:13

"You will be aware of the recent decisions on the future of Air Cadet Gliding, which will see the demise of most of the Vigilant fleet, leaving only circa 15 for the next few years, and a significant reduction in gliding locations. There is no way I can dress all this up as good news. However, much media coverage has been ill-informed, mischievous and selective with the facts. As your President, and also Hon President of 2 FTS, I wanted to give you all my view of the background, the decisions and the future.

In terms of my own role in all this, you will be aware that I could exert influence, but the final decisions were taken by the senior executive of the RAF, taking into account affordability, the needs of the ACO and a vision of the future. It was especially necessary to consider the cost-effectiveness of a lengthy recovery programme for the Vigilant fleet, alongside the requirement to re-engine the motor gliders in the 2020 timeframe.

I have briefed you before on the reasons behind the current grounding of the VGS fleet, which is now approaching two years. In essence, the root causes were a stiffening of flight safety regulations post the scathing Nimrod accident review by Haddon-Cave QC, and the subsequent discovery of significant shortcomings in engineering governance in the VGS fleet. With cadet safety paramount, especially after the tragic Tutor accidents of recent years, I believe the ACO authorities had no choice but to initiate the pause to flying.

There has been understandable criticism of how the decisions were announced. However, government rules emphatically prohibit any advanced notice of sensitive decisions until Ministers have made formal announcements. Informal briefings invariably leak, with consequent embarrassment. Moreover, there have been extensive discussions and consultations between senior officers and the VGS community; I attended on several occasions. Of course, in the end a decision was taken at Air Force Board level, but no one can fairly claim that they were in the dark on the dire state of the fleet, the costs involved to mount a full recovery, and the difficult decisions which had to be made. I might add that the Commandant Air Cadets personally wrote to all members of the ACO as soon as protocol allowed, with a full explanation, expression of deep regret, especially for those displaced instructors, and a clear message about future aviation opportunities. In addition, John Middleton will visit every affected VGS; he has been to 10 already.

On the plans themselves, whilst there will be far fewer gliding locations,there will be more fully refurbished Vikings at more sites, new high speed winches are being procured, the training package will be better and will include excellent STE, and the remaining centres of excellence will boast vastly improved infrastructure, including bespoke accommodation. Indeed, with a rationalised fleet of purely conventional gliders, I would argue that the true gliding experience should be enhanced. Taken alongside significantly increased powered air experience flying (AEF), with plans for two more Flights, using aircraft currently in reserve, the ACO has no reason to fear that flying opportunities are under threat. The 'Air' element will remain at the heart of the Organisation.

Of course, much of the VGS package represents bad news, notably for so many dedicated instructors; my heart goes out to them. However, some will be able to convert to AEF on the Tutor; others will be offered a crossover to the Viking. Sadly, many will not be able to continue serving the ACO, and their feelings of being let down are entirely understandable.

So, very challenging days for the VGS community, ourselves included, but in the end the decisions are logical, were as well managed as protocol allows, and we must now move forward. I will do my best to ensure that current plans are progressed as quickly as possible, that appropriate deals are made available to the Vigilant instructors, and that you are all kept informed of progress. In the future, I will be looking with John Middleton at ways of increasing conventional gliding opportunities, especially as the remaining Vigilants are phased out. Clear possibilities include RAFGSA, Civilian Clubs for bespoke scholarship courses, and perhaps the addition of another glider type to the current Viking fleet. Your views at Linton will be much appreciated. I shall be wearing my flack jacket!

Warm Regards
Chris

Sir Christopher Coville

President FOGIES

Hon President 2 FTS
Supplementary Notes:

- The decisions on future Air Cadet gliding were taken in the best interests of cadet flying opportunities, not to make savings.
- The motor glider sorties are largely being replaced by more capable, interesting and varied Tutor sorties, which unlike the Vigilant can include aerobatics.
- Conventional Viking gliding opportunities will increase threefold, as a result of fleet size enhancement and acquisition of additional modern winches.
- Number of flying sites (AEF and VGS) remains about the same.
- Number of flying opportunities largely unaffected, but could actually increase as new winches, increased Viking numbers and additional AEF role out.
- New, modern simulators will add value to airborne time.
- The whole training package is being improved, along with far better infrastructure.
- The final distribution of gliders and AEF will maximise flying opportunities for cadets, taking into account travel distances and regional needs.
- When recovery is complete, the UK ACO will have the largest youth flying enterprise in the world, and the largest single fleet of conventional gliders in any similar organisation."

Cows getting bigger

21st Mar 2016, 09:59

The final supplementary note may be true; but the fleet will be far smaller than it was. :(

longer ron

21st Mar 2016, 10:16

iRaven
Like Coffman, I play the facts, not the person. But this was uploaded 3 years ago to YouTube and it shows OC2FTS' "personal" views, when he was a Regional Commandant, on the use of technology and 'quality over quantity'. This would chime with my previous conspiracy theory that today's position has been a long time coming:

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjn8lRO3tsM)

I have not posted on this thread for some time,surely there cannot be many people now who believe this was just an airworthiness issue - I am not a 'conspiracy theorist' at heart but I believe this situation has been handled in at best an amateur way by the brass and at worst in a very devious way by the brass .
I certainly do not blame one man but I would still question who and why gave him that particular job at such a crucial time,his 'personality' is well known in the RAF - especially since he was overage for the post anyway.
The Haddon Cave report was a long time ago and it cannot really be blamed for something that was 'found' only 2 years ago,I have seen many machinations in my aviation career and this one is up there with the best (worst) of them :rolleyes:

Corporal Clott

21st Mar 2016, 10:17

There is no way I can dress all this up as good news.

When I first read this I thought it was not going to do exactly that. Then I read the supplementary notes and saw 'window dressing' yet again. I wonder if the supplementary notes were from Sir Chris?

On the messaging of VGS OCs and Stn Cdrs about the decision. This is a modern age, and so as soon as the Written Ministerial Statement (WMS) came out around 1230hrs on 10 Mar 16, then all OCs should have been texted and emailled a link ASAP; better to find out this way from an official source rather than Facebook and text message notes of condolence. The previous 2 videos keep talking about 'use of technology' in the Air Cadets - then use it! Writing letters to Stn Cdrs dated 1 day after the announcement and speaking to the staff 3 hours after the announcement is very bad form in my humble opinion. I believe it could have been done so much better:

1. Text link of Ministerial Statement to all VGS OCs with a note stating "HQ 2FTS will call you as soon as we can".
2. Follow up call needs to be brief - "Hello Sqn Ldr X, I'm dreadfully sorry to tell you....etc...I have 13 other Sqn Cdrs to call right now, but I wanted you all to know at the very earliest opportunity. I must go but one of my staff will call you straight back with further details."
3. The follow up staff probably won't know much more than the VGS OC but at least they have someone to chat with and start to help sort out the jumbled, and sometimes irrational, thoughts that a Sqn disbandment announcement can bring.

Why would this have been so very difficult? Many knew for weeks that an announcement was expected and so putting a plan in place like the one above was quite simple. Defence WMS normally come out on a Thursday and so you could even plan the right day of the week!!!

CPL Clott

PS. "Clear possibilities include RAFGSA, Civilian Clubs for bespoke scholarship courses, and perhaps the addition of another glider type to the current Viking fleet" - Hallelujah, Sir Chris :D:D:D

Chugalug2

21st Mar 2016, 10:29

Sir Christopher Coville (c/o ATFQ) :-
In essence, the root causes were a stiffening of flight safety regulations post the scathing Nimrod accident review by Haddon-Cave QC,
The root cause was the deliberate and malevolent actions of a few RAF VSO's in the late 80's and early 90's. They sabotaged UK Military Air Safety for short term financial gain (to compensate for the incompetent policies of AMSO), subverting Military Airworthiness by ordering subordinates to suborn the regulations but to sign them off as complied with anyway or face disciplinary action. Pretty soon there were no experienced engineers left who knew the regulations, let alone were prepared to enforce them against such pressures. They were replaced by inexperienced untrained non-engineers who would do as they were told. The regulations themselves were scrapped so that they could not be quoted. The Airworthiness of all UK military aircraft and systems thus took a hit from which it has never recovered. All of this was covered up by subsequent serving VSOs, the MOD, Haddon-Cave, and Lord Phillip, and was only exposed in the long running campaign in this forum to reverse the infamous finding of the Mull of Kintyre BoI ROs, Messrs Wratten and Day.

It is thus not only the Air Cadets that have fallen foul of that sabotage but UK Military Aviation as a whole, particularly the Royal Air Force. The only way to start the 1000 mile march to reinstate UK Military Airworthiness provision and maintenance is to make the MAA and the MilAAIB independent of the MOD and of each other, and time is of the essence...

romeo bravo

21st Mar 2016, 10:34

LJ - not sure if I'm missing something on your map of AEFs. The map shows roughly where their associated UASs may be, but not AEFs; thats unless they plan to move the Tutor fleet around again.

For example, CUAS is in Cambridge and LUAS in London, but both flying from RAF Wittering; home of 5 AEF. Same with EMUAS, based in Nottingham, but flies from Cranwell; home of 7 AEF.

Lima Juliet

21st Mar 2016, 10:49

Freda Checks

21st Mar 2016, 10:56

Thanks to iRaven for posting this earlier.

If you want a conspiracy theory, the 2016 decision was stitched together as early as 2012:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...0Study%20O.pdf (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/207647/response/532404/attach/4/20140623%20FOI%2001063%20ACO%20Flying%20Glider%20Study%20O.p df)At the time of this report (Dec 2012) there were 27 VGS establishments with 146 aircraft (65 Vigilants and 81 Vikings)

How is it possible for the paperwork on 146 airframes to go missing? One or two perhaps under very special circumstances, but 146!! Knowing how these things should work (even with a contractor working for MoD) someone must have asked someone for permission to destroy (what would have been a mountain) of this very valuable paperwork. Someone put a signature to a document allowing this to happen, but surely they will have ensured that there was a copy or at least the info should have been transferred to digital media?? Perhaps things have changed since I was involved with Air Cadet gliding some 40 years ago, but even then the paperwork required was becoming unbearable.

The more I think about it and having re-read iRaven's document the more I agree with many of the posters that this was a plan put in place long before the "pause". Losing the paperwork was just an excuse to sit on hands doing nothing and have yet another review of Air Cadet gliding.

Perhaps we could invite Haddon-Cave to investigate and uncover who was responsible for authorising the destruction of the paperwork leading to this debacle.

Yes, conspiracy does spring to mind:ugh:

Why oh why

21st Mar 2016, 13:11

I'll redirect you to my post #1837.

Direct fron the RA
Maintenance records should be retained until the work it records has been
invalidated by documented work carried out subsequently (for example, Scheduled
Base Maintenance (SBM), Major maintenance, or equivalent); RA4311 and MAP-01
Chapter 7.6 provides further regulation and guidance in this respect.

No where does it say keep until the world ends

Freda Checks

21st Mar 2016, 13:30

So there must be some documentation then??

Maintenance records should be retained until the work it records has been
invalidated by documented work carried out subsequently

Arclite01

21st Mar 2016, 13:33

The obvious solution was really for the system to repair the Vikings and replace the Vigilants with another Motorglider. Possibly the Ximango.............

While that was going on, place a long term order for Viking replacement.

Problem solved..............

Arc

WRT to JM I have not met the man, I don't know him from Adam, but the 'Interview' on You Tube (URL higher up this thread) left me feeling that he was a 'Cold Fish', with no personality and an inability to connect with his audience, as well as appearing to have no sincerity at all..............on that basis totally the correct man for this job.<<Politician>>

Why oh why

21st Mar 2016, 13:58

With regards to your statement/statements. I'll repeat myself.

Maintenance records should be retained until the work it records has been
invalidated by documented work carried out subsequently (for example, Scheduled
Base Maintenance (SBM), Major maintenance, or equivalent); RA4311 and MAP-01
Chapter 7.6 provides further regulation and guidance in this respect.

i dont think that anyone,(well apart from the biggest buffon) thinks that ALL the paperwork for specific aircraft is AWOL

Further to my even earlier post, on the Viking at my VGS (with a 3 year interval between majors) with a current major , there would be no requirement to hold any MWO past that 36 month timescale, for minor repetive tasks, that duration can be as short as 28 days. MAA rules.

cats_five

21st Mar 2016, 14:13

How is it possible for the paperwork on 146 airframes to go missing? One or two perhaps under very special circumstances, but 146!!

Did it ever exist in an acceptable format and level of detail?

teeteringhead

21st Mar 2016, 14:44

Did it ever exist in an acceptable format and level of detail? That's probably the key [my bold]

VX275

21st Mar 2016, 14:48

No where does it say keep until the world ends
Your quote is correct for Cat B paperwork but Cat A is required to be kept for 5 years after an aircraft is taken out of service. If its the Cat A paperwork that has gone missing there needs to be questions asked. If it hasn't, the argument for the loss of airworthiness loses some of its strength.

1.3VStall

21st Mar 2016, 15:08

Since when did a Flying Training School need an Honorary President? It's supposed to be a operational organisation for f***s sake, not some sort of Service club that needs a long retired VSO as a figurehead.

Wander00

21st Mar 2016, 15:12

But if it is to have a President I can think of none better than CCCC. He has experience of volunteers as President of RAFA Europe, and of the ACO as an AEF pilot. He is also a current glider pilot. He seems, IMHO anyway, to tick all the boxes.

teeteringhead

21st Mar 2016, 15:24

Absolutely agree Wander00. CCCC ( 4 x Cs surely?) is indeed a top bloke under whom I have served with pleasure - IIRC - three times.

Shame he's an Evertonian really ............. (only joking Sir!)

Arclite01

21st Mar 2016, 15:46

I have nothing but respect for CCC

I liked his post. He's the first VSO to declare his hand and involvement.

The only thing I can say is that I'd rather he had spoken to people at the VGS's than the the Ivory Tower people at 2FTS and HQAC they would have got a more balanced view (if they had wanted it of course............) and some more options.............

I think he is right in his assumptions and I do feel that it's unlikely we will see a reverse of the decision now. However 'it's not over until it's over' and you never know what is around the corner. My thoughts are that unfortunately ACO Gliding (like most other 'facilities') would be incredibly expensive to restart once it's decommissioned (model holds good for a range of industries - shipbuilding, coal, steel, aerospace etc) as the capital required just isn't there, and UK Plc wants everything 'now' rather than thinking about '5 years time'. 6 months after this announcement there will be no 'seedcorn' to plant from.......................

'I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith'

Arc

Whizz Bang

21st Mar 2016, 17:43

RB

Sorry it was an old map. However, I understand there will be a 13 AEF and a 14 AEF stood up. One of which is supposedly expected in Northern Ireland to replace the Newtonards VGS. Looking at the other AEF location, it surely must go to Wales?

Don't get me wrong, I don't think AEF is a good replacement for VGS gliding. But then again I don't think motorgliders are good for keeping the Cadets amused all day either - conventional gliding is the best by far in my opinion. :ok:

LJ
Oh LJ, you fell for it and applied logic!

I'm reliably informed that the current candidate for the other new AEF is at Odiham.

The Vigilant never was great for hands on but it was a more productive machine for the input, even when the hourly costings (£ 250?!) were applied with all the costs of the 'professionals'... who led us to this mess.

To me the most important product of the VGS system is (was) the ability to send kids solo. No matter how this is dressed up there will be less solo even with the new system at full capacity (unless the VGSs start flying full time!).

Air experience at all levels before that point was (is) pretty unengaging and poorly structured so I welcome some of the new ideas that have emerged from the debacle. The quality of the synthetics is questionable but as part of a broader package may well retain interest.

A single fleet is flawed. But then if there are going to be two conventional types why not return to the 'old' system?

Big Pistons Forever

21st Mar 2016, 18:08

To me the most important product of the VGS system is (was) the ability to send kids solo.

The Canadian Air Cadet glider program not only sends Air Cadets solo but every year 230 to 250 air cadets get Transport Canada (ie the Canadian equivalent to the CAA) issued glider pilot licenses after completing the Air Cadet glider training program.

Suitably proficient Air Cadet Glider pilots have the opportunity to fly other younger cadets on glider experience flights.

I think the key elements of this record of success are as follows.

1) The gliders and tow planes are owned by the Air Cadet organization and are civilian registered and operated under civil gliding regulations.

2) All of the flying qualifications including those of the instructors are civilian licenses

3) No flash glass ship flash, just the simple all metal just about un-bustable SW 2-33, is the only type operated. It's extremely benign flying characteristics make it the perfect first glider for new young pilot.

4) Air Force direct involvement is mostly on operational flight safety matters and providing a relatively stable core funding stream to the Air Cadet organization.

The Canadian Air Cadet program has its problems too but after watching the slow motion Shyte Show that is the present and future UK Air Cadet flying program it seems a shame that the flying "pause" was not used to transform the program to a civilian based operation which has been so successful else where........

POBJOY

21st Mar 2016, 19:35

Whilst not wishing to dispute the Hon Pres 2 FTS motives in 'pouring oil' on very turbulent waters the fact that he holds that post means in practice he is part of the system,and therefore not an impartial observer of the debacle.
I wonder how much contact he has had with a broad section of VGS operators,or indeed the 'actual actions' of Cmmt 2FTS.
He makes the same comments re AEF Accidents yet fails to also mention these were not airworthiness issues or involved volunteer staff.
He also 'plays up' the AEF factor when in fact there is no evidence that it in any way replaces the loss of Cadet Solo training,and as for aerobatics; well the T21's on Cadet flights were doing that over 4 decades ago.
The main crux though is no one is seemingly responsible for the complete failure of the tech back up that was the ultimate responsibility of the RAF.
There is no suggestion that any 'posts' are going to change in the ATC organisation that has so badly lost its capable leadership on the flying side.
However from my viewpoint it is the total lack of flying and tech respect shown to the Squadrons that leads me to the conclusion that the 'system' (who have been shown wanting) are in complete denial about their failure to deliver that part of the operation that they alone were responsible for.
As alluded to before if there are no changes at the top then nothing will change as the Titanic mentality is alive and well and they hope if they trot out the same old hype people will believe it.
Just calling an operation 2FTS does not confer any relationship to that organisation with a previous regime of flying training that held that name.And by the way no one 'hides' behind call signs it is normal practice for a forum,which in this case that has exposed the failures in a system we all revered and think it deserves better.

c4aero

21st Mar 2016, 20:08

I am not an old VSO; my last rank was Fg Off, and I am more proud of my flying and command experience than anything else!
The reason I am an Hon President of 2 FTS is out of respect for the Hon President of Air Cadet Gliding, Bill Walker, who is terminally ill. I am, if you like, replicating his job without upsetting his family by assuming his title.
I have indeed visited several VGS, and do not frequent the MOD. I fly with many VGS pilots in a civilian capacity.
I believe in telling it as it is. The problems of the glider fleet go back many years, predate most in command appointments, many of whom have been working their socks off to try and solve this problem.
My priorities:
- The Cadets
- Getting the very best deal for the great volunteer instructors who will lose their Vigilant slots.
- Recovering the Vikings.
- Pressing for delivery of the full infrastructure piece.
- Looking at how best to recover capability, especially once the remaining Vigilants leave service; this means dedication from us all, leadership and investment. None is impossible if we all pull together.

I am a non-exec, but in my last remaining active years will dedicate myself to the ACO and VGS.

Anyone have any trouble with this; let us hear what you have to say, and don't hide behind screen names!

Venture Adventure!

Chris Coville

(Yes, I am indeed an Evertonian; perhaps the only one to have risen above the rank of Cpl!)

TheChitterneFlyer

21st Mar 2016, 20:40

As an Air Cadet in the 1960s I flew in quite a few aircraft types but, to be fair, the RAF then had a huge number of RAF Stations and many aircraft types. Of the four annual camps that I attended, only the one unit was a none flying station; albeit that it did have a Chipmunk AEF. The RAF of today is a much smaller organisation and that their operational commitments are of a much higher order of magnitude. Is it therefore not understandable that the opportunity to fly Air Cadets, with air experience flying, is increasingly problematic?

On the subject of gliding courses, I did achieve my ATC A&B gliding certificate at RAF Hemswell. I was one of the lucky ones to be invited to return and, perhaps, become a staff cadet to assist with gliding operations for other cadets. I would "hitch-hike" from Sheffield to RAF Hemswell, every weekend, in the hope that my efforts would be rewarded by just the one flight before "hitch hiking" all the way back home and readying myself for school the next morning. I would surmise, in retrospect, that only a handful of cadets were ever selected to gain the opportunity to, perhaps, continue to fly beyond their A&B certificates. Given the huge numbers involved in giving (todays) cadets the opportunity to fly, are we perhaps kidding ourselves that we can do all of this on a shoestring budget and with fewer opportunities of RAF airframe availability?

Within a much earlier post (within this thread) I had suggested that, during the pause to flying, that cadets should, perhaps, be given a good grounding within the art of pilot navigation. The response, at that time, was met with much derision of, and I quote, "Most cadets don't have the mental capacity to wish to engage within the suggested mental arithmetic to remain interested in flying"!

I would therefore suggest that, for many (cadets), the futuristic belief that they might become fighter pilots isn't achievable! However, the fact that they might become more aviation orientated by experiencing free flight in a glider, could well become the catalyst for them to join the RAF in some other form of aviation related employment.

The "bottom line" in all of this "return to flight" saga is, what is the worth of Air Cadet Gliding upon the recruitment of cadets into the RAF?

To all of those folk who might wonder, or object, to the Haddon-Cave report. Yes, it has taken some significant time to filter down to Air Cadet gliding operations but, the MAA has had to consider, firstly, front line operations above all others. Like it or not, the MAA has a job to do and that it was wholly appropriate for the DH to pause flying operations. Everyone has been focussing on the word "pause"... it was initially meant to be a "pause", though, the enormity of the findings has gone well beyond what was initially thought to be something of a hiccup.

Air Cadet gliding has entered a new era of military aviation management and airworthiness requirements, which is the alignment of Air Cadet gliding operations to that of every other aircraft platform operated, and managed, by the military.

The pre-emptive strike that has been previously alluded to, by the release of the 2012 document, I believe, was a well written document and that each and every consideration was taken into account when considering the effects of the suggested closure of each VGS. Whilst that the report might not be well received by everyone, it does address the facts that were known at that time... it was a balanced report.

Where to go from here... deliver the capabilities as they are known today and for the foreseeable future. I believe that the report delivered the correct answers.

TCF

Subsunk

21st Mar 2016, 20:53

To c4aero;

Sir, welcome to pprune. We all fly, and most of us got our eyes opened to the fantastic world of aviation via the ATC.

The emotion on this fairly epic thread stems from one reason - the life-changing opportunities that we all experienced have been denied to current and future Air Cadets. To add to this, the dedication and passion of adult volunteers has been flushed down the toilet, after decades of loyal service.

To add insult to injury, all this has come about due to internal MoD politics, incompetence and arrogance.

There are many good air-minded people within the system, but they have been overridden by all kinds of vested interests, to the point where a young person has to choose between learning to glide or joning the ATC. Naturally, finances will dictate that decision for many.

Again, with respect, many posters on here will remain behind screen names. MoD can be fairly vindictive and ruthless as far as its self-image goes. We are loyal to the original aims of the ATC, and are heartbroken to see where the movement currently is.

Again, welcome to pprune, from a fellow bluenose.

longer ron

21st Mar 2016, 21:00

TCF
it was initially meant to be a "pause", though, the enormity of the findings has gone well beyond what was initially thought to be something of a hiccup.

The trouble is TCF - it appears that under cover of invoking the 'safety case' the brass have taken the opportunity to decimate the Gliding Units.
My view is that instead of being upfront about wholesale cuts to the ACO gliding system 'The Brass' have used the 'Pause' in a very devious way to chop out the Units they want to get rid of.
As I have said previously surely not many people now are naïve enough to believe this whole sorry saga has not been a devious way of making defence cuts !

c4aero

21st Mar 2016, 21:13

Thanks, Subsunk.
OK, but we will have to disagree on some issues here.
We have a choice: whinge, rent our garments, cry 'it's them up there again', or get stuck into the challenge of returning aviation in full to the ACO.
I'm going for the latter option,
Chris C

Corporal Clott

21st Mar 2016, 21:22

Sir Chris

Thank you for coming forward. I am enthused with your notion of using Service air sports clubs to help provide flying. I am also pleased to hear that another type may be considered (ASK21s? We could call it the Vanguard! :ok:).

The infrastructure piece makes me whince a little. The chosen bases for the new look VGS seems odd:

1. Syerston. Apart from a spangly new maintenance area the rest of the Station is falling to bits. The runway also needs a resurface and the nearest RAF accomodation is Cranwell some 45 minutes away.
2. Little Rissington. In the winter it is normally in cloud and also needs a small fortune spending on it.
3. Kenley. Stuck under the London TMA on Common Land with access-right issues. No proper accommodation and a long way from any RAF support.
4. Predannack. Another airfield which has seen its best. Yes, it gets support from nearby Culdrose, but that's it. Not a RAF facility.
5. Wethersfield. Now a MoD Police facility and therefore outwith support of the RAF.
6. Ternhill. Away from mainstream RAF and relies on the Army's support.
7. Woodvale. Away from mainstream RAF support.
8. Topcliffe. Away from RAF mainstream and relies on the Army.
9. Kirknewton. Possibly the oddest of the lot. Normally a quagmire most of the year round. Not supported by mainstream RAF.
10. Hullavington replacement - Merryfield. Another ghost town with little infrastructure to support.

So why keep these and pull out of RAF main stations like RAF Cosford, St Athan, Henlow, Linton, Halton, Honington and Odiham? Also, the possibly better supported RMB Chivenor and Arbroath, plus Abingdon? I know some of these might be part of a DIO plan for disposal in the long term, but quite a few aren't. The infra bill at the VGS sites are going to be huge - money that could be spent on gliders!!! Also the infra receipts for these VGS-only places could be huge - real estate inside the M25 or the Cotswolds!

It's just one of a series of more and more baffling infra decisions in recent years accross defence. We'll shut Cosford to go to St Athan, then its we're all going to Lyneham, then its we'll stay at Cosford. Let's move all training into Shrivenham, hold on, it's too full. Let's put everything into Brize, oh hang on, it doesn't quite fit. Let's shut Leuchars but keep it open as a weather diversion. Merge PTC with STC then decide it doesn't fit at High Wycombe - rusticate some parts to Halton. Let's sell Halton for peanuts and then have to find a shed load of extra cash (hundreds of millions) to put recruit training at Cranwell. Having purpose built the Centre of Av Med at Henlow a few years back then let's move it to Cranwell. Then Cranwell is full with legacy flying training and MFTS planning to run alongside each other and the rest of RAF Lincolnshire living in their married quarters.

The infrastructure for the VGS is just as baffling as it is for the rest of us, so I guess I shouldn't be so surprised! I wonder if we need some operators in DIO instead of blotter-jotters that tend take these slots! :E

Excuse me for hiding behind my nome de plume but I doubt OC Admin Wg (or Base Support, or whatever) will like my last comment!

Anyway, thanks again for coming forward to the debate. :ok:

CPL Clott

PS. i'm sure some incumbents from the remaining VGS sites will say everything is rosy at their locations and a nice new shiney hangar and accomodation block is all they need!

PPS. Having just read your latest post, I agree, getting behind the wheel to get Cadets flying is the primary aim. But I think we should also challenge this decision in the mean time as well to see if there are further efficiencies/advantages to be had.

Waterwings2

21st Mar 2016, 21:25

just for information, a probable basing strategy for VGS/AEF (Based on a recent town hall meeting with OC 2FTS) compared with the 2014 laydown. I no longer have a horse in this race, but all the best to the VGS folks who are suddenly surplus!

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wrj8qe24421qrrm/AEF%20Comparison.png?dl=1

Already happening:
- 621 moving to Merryfield from Hullavington
- 13 AEF stood up at Aldergrove (# not confirmed, but co-located with Northern Ireland UAS)

Unconfirmed but probable (mentioned by OC 2FTS):
- UAS/AEF to move into Exeter Airport (BUAS seems the only real candidate, as Colerne probably won't have much hope in the Defence Estate Review and no one else is close - shown here as 3 AEF)
- UAS/AEF to move into Odiham (potentially someone moving in (London UAS?) or the second new AEF Squadron (shown here as 14 AEF))

The above is guesswork on my part (the map shows that option) - OUAS could move from Benson to Odiham and the new AEF could stand up at Exeter, .: BUAS would either stay or move somewhere else more local. Until the Defence Estates reports in the summer it's all conjecture.

2FTS didn't mention the northern Squadrons but Linton is probably a likely candidate to be closed, and potentially Leeming as well. No idea where current sqns likely to move to.

I stand ready to be proved wrong almost immediately.

POBJOY

21st Mar 2016, 21:59

Quote:- Get stuck into the challenge of returning aviation in full to the ACO

Oh yes, and where are the dedicated, experienced, proven volunteers,going to come from,and more to the point where is the Leadership that can LEAD.
This is not about personalities it is about hard facts; one of which is the ability of sound judgement and knowing the job.In any other sector (especially those using volunteers) you take staff with you and encourage involvement; a factor totally devoid in the current 'management' of Cadet Gliding.

BEagle

21st Mar 2016, 22:02

c4aero, thanks for coming on here and also for a certain epic 'Boulmer Sector Conference Dinner' at RAF Leeming rather a few years ago...!! Which cost us rather a lot thanks to the destructive ways of a few Lightning mates....

I'm intrigued by the use of Merryfield. I first knew it as RAF Merryfield in my (actual) childhood, when it housed a busy Vampire AFS and also some Canberras when Bassingbourn was being resurfaced. Westlands worked on Wyverns and F-86 as well as other aircraft and then came the RN squadrons once the AFS closed, as Yeovilton was being extended for the Sea Vixen. Lots of flying to keep a small boy interested as we lived on the approach.

When the RN moved out, most of the infrastructure went into 'care and maintenance'. But not much of either, really. Local 'travellers' helped themselves to all the wiring, drain covers, window frames and all other metal items, so after the hangars and old control tower were pulled down, there was little left. We kept 3000 pigs in the old domestic site and Officers' Mess (which probably improved the tone) and the old Westlands site became a formal gypsy site. RAFGSA came on an exped and lived in tents and the remains of the old ATC tower - and sent me solo in a T21.

In later decades when the station re-opened for RN helicopter work, everything other than the small air traffic enclave was levelled - there is NOTHING in the way of any other permanent buildings or safe storage for winches and gliders now. Also there are some very vocal noise moaners living nearby; oddly enough they didn't seem quite so concerned about the Vampires and later Sea Venoms, Sea Hawks and Gannets. So while those in charge of Merryfield would no doubt be content for ACO gliding, there will be a considerable cost in infrastructural terms...

I do hope that at least that part of the new ACO strategy goes ahead though.

Oh and Merryfield isn't 'near Exeter' - it's about 40 miles from there. Try Taunton?

ATFQ

21st Mar 2016, 22:08

Sir Christopher,

Having had sight of the FOGIES note I think that I and some others would greatly appreciate your thoughts on the following extracts/points - through one route or another - if you are able to offer them:

'The motor glider sorties are largely being replaced by more capable, interesting and varied Tutor sorties'; will it be possible for the AEFs to provide cadets with any formal flying training akin to elements of the Vigilant syllabus and, if so, which elements? Is the intention for CFS to pursue a bespoke qualification to enable non QFIs to be able to teach certain upper air exercises in a more formal sense?

'Conventional Viking gliding opportunities will increase threefold'; does this mean that the number of Viking launches will increase by a factor of 3 (from circa 48,000 to circa 144,000, once we have moved from 8 Viking VGS to 10 enlarged Viking VGS), or does it mean that 3 times the number of cadets will fly Vikings annually but each do on average only a third of the launches they would have done previously, or does it mean something else?

'fleet size enhancement'? Does this mean more Vikings (beyond the current planned fleet size of 73+) or the introduction of a new aircraft type?

Looking into the future, will any consideration be given to the introduction of a sufficiently sized fleet of new motor gliders - to enable operations across the UK where there are now the biggest gaps in gliding availability (and where there are no suitable airfields from which winch-launched gliders could be operated), noting their enhanced flexibility/'deployability'?

Will the ACO continue to send the highest number of 1st solos of any gliding organisation in the world each year? In 2014 I understand the annual requirement was for in excess of 2000 Gliding Scholarships; how will this number have changed once 'steady state' has been reached? A major incentive to becoming an Air Cadet is obviously the opportunity to fly (in anything). AEF becomes more personal and adds to the attraction. Gliding offers the 'gold standard' prospect of being able to fly one's 1st solo or beyond, even for the least-well-off cadets, with the springboard and confidence this provides for the future - whether in Service or civilian life. A lot of us (perhaps most of us) commenting on this site would not be where we are today let alone able to give back all that we do had we not been given this opportunity - at zero personal financial cost. The overall cost in Defence spending terms is extremely small given the return on the investment, and we still need to generate our future staff and QGIs. But you know all this.

I think most people are unlikely to declare their identities to you until they feel they can trust their command chain. At that point there will be no need for this thread.

c4aero

21st Mar 2016, 23:20

Brief 'pause' from me, as I am off to Linton soon to award Qualified Aerospace Instructors Course certificates to air cadets?
I do not have the specialist knowledge to answer all your points, ATFQ, or to address all your very valid infrastructure issues, Cpl Clott! However, it has become increasingly difficult to run VGS activities on operational stations, as most are being backfilled with operational units as the number of MOBs reduces. As you say, DIO run the show here, and they are under remit to rationalise the Defence Estate. On constantly changing plans; true, but funding, politics and the bad guys are dynamic, not static.
But I would for now make the following points, the detail for which come from staff briefings:

- I believe the right aviation mix for the ACO is conventional gliders and AEF.
- The whole cadet aviation syllabus is indeed being revamped
- Only about 40ish Vikings were regularly used in the past; 73 will be used in the future, with additional more capable winches.
- There will be a 70% increase in Tutor sorties
- We have run several RAFGSA and BGA site courses for cadets during the pause; why not gap fill with these in the future, using ACO officers as required?

For Pobjoy, I suggest you reduce the venom in your comments if you want to be taken seriously. I don't need a lesson in leadership of volunteers; I run 7 charities!
Chris C

POBJOY

22nd Mar 2016, 00:13

C4 aero

Sir I was not aware that i questioned 'your' leadership,but if you care to check back on nearly TWO YEARS of this thread the common factor is all about the leadership of the ACO, and especially the lack of it on the gliding front.
The vast majority of those that post here do so because we feel the Cadet organisation that was so special to us has been badly let down and and the so-called recovery process is quite frankly a non event. How can an organisation heal itself with the same (paid staff) that got it into the mess to start with.
Remember; the tax payers are the ones who are still providing the resources that have been squandered with a disgraceful lack of 'provision'. The real loss is to the reputation of the Cadet organisation as a provider of an aviation experience to youngsters from all backgrounds.There are no winners here; so far two years worth of Venture Adventure has been lost despite the tax payers having paid for it.

spannermonkey

22nd Mar 2016, 02:05

I'm curious, has it been clearly defined what the issues actually were that led to the aircraft being grounded for the past two years.

I understand there was an issue found with the controls of the aircraft, specifically connections between the cables and the control surfaces (rudder) cracking/failing. Is that the only issues or where there also others. I have read posts regarding possible incorrect/missing maintenance documentation and possibly that preventative maintenance had not being carried out - but what are the factual elements. If there was a lack of preventative maintenance as defined in the PM schedules, was that lack of maintenance attributable to the failing in the control components. Its the facts that are important.

The answer to these questions are really where the focus should be. I get that there is frustration in the way this entire issue is now being addressed and that the Vigilant fleet has been decimated - frustration I share having been a member of staff at a VGS, but that is more to do with the 'recovery', which may not be the most appropriate word given the plan that has now been presented and is a separate issue to that of 'Continued Airworthiness'

If there were indeed failings in the CA of the aircraft - that is what should be the focus of attention. The MAA Regulatory Articles are very clear in regard of an accredited Maintenance, Technical, Design or other such organization and their Accountable Executives and 'Nominated' Post Holders - be they military or civil.

BEagle

22nd Mar 2016, 05:38

The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Save UK Air Cadet Gliding”.

Government responded:

The MOD has confirmed plans to relaunch Air Cadet Aviation to ensure cadet flying opportunities are available whilst delivering value for money.

Air Cadet Gliding had to be paused in 2014 due to safety concerns with our aircraft. A full inspection programme was initiated with a view to recovering all of the aircraft. However after substantial operational, technical and commercial negotiations with a range of leading aerospace companies, for most of the Vigilant aircraft and a few of the Vikings it no longer represented sensible value for money to continue their repair.

In order to give Cadets the opportunity to start flying again following an Air Cadet Organisation review there will be at least 73 Vikings, a fleet of up to 15 Vigilant aircraft, combined with an increase of an extra 25 Grob Tutor fixed wing Air Experience Flights (AEFs) – a more than 50% increase on previous flights. We are committed to returning as many gliders to the skies as possible while ensuring the safety of cadets and instructors. For the first time this will be backed by a range of realistic simulators provided by the RAF Charitable Trust.

The restructured glider fleet will be operated by fewer, but larger, Volunteer Gliding Squadrons (VGS), which will have a regional focus and be better integrated with synthetic training and increased AEF locations. The RAF is fully committed to Air Cadet flying. Where Cadets will have to travel longer distances, we are increasing investment in VGS and AEF sites to include residential accommodation for cadets and staff. In the future cadet flying will be better associated with force development and ground training opportunities alongside the gliding and flying.

The RAF acknowledges this has been a tough period for cadets and instructors and is grateful for the patience and understanding of the Volunteer Gliding Squadron instructors who continue to provide inspiration and leadership to generations of cadets. Air Cadet flying will be safer and far more resilient in the long run; enabling all cadets across the United Kingdom to have equal access to flying opportunities and which better integrates and allocates cadet flying opportunities between realistic synthetic flight simulation, glider flying and an increase of AEF flights.

Ministry of Defence

:hmm:

So much emphasis on 'value for money'. Price of everything, value of rather less than anything?

I'm still convinced that the 'synthetic training' will be worthless and will actually provide negative training. Again I ask whether a proper TNA was conducted and also whether experienced flight training SMEs identified the appropriate training media for skill-based training as being these PTTs?

Wander00

22nd Mar 2016, 08:51

What Beags said! "Don't confuse me with facts, my mind is made up" seems to be the "official" line

622

22nd Mar 2016, 09:29

"The restructured glider fleet will be operated by fewer, but larger, Volunteer Gliding Squadrons (VGS)"

I will be intrigued to see how they make the Viking VGS's larger!

You can only operate a certain number of conventional gliders in the circuit at ay one time (Granted, the 'few' soaring days a year may help!).

Airbus38

22nd Mar 2016, 09:36

BEagle - Following on from previous I also note the fact that they are again referred to (incorrectly) as

"realistic flight simulators"

Just as the Commandant referred to them in her Christmas YouTube video. Perhaps they feel that if they keep calling them such, people will take it as a given that that's what they are?

DaveUnwin

22nd Mar 2016, 10:11

Couldn't agree more with BEagle - I very much doubt that the PTTs will be any use, and even giving cadets rides in Tutors and Vigilants doesn't do it for me. Being flown in an aeroplane means very little. Babes-in-arms and great grandmothers are flown in aeroplanes every day. To paraphrase (I think Lillenthal) "to be flown in an aeroplane is nothing - to fly an aeroplane, everything!" One of the great things about pure gliding (apart from that a lot more cadets actually get to fly, and solo) is that by its very nature everyone's involved and that although a cadet can take pride in a wonderful solo achievement, it is simply not possible without teamwork.

Arclite01

22nd Mar 2016, 10:16

Dave Unwin

No greater satisfaction than Cadets talking loudly, exchanging experiences and finally the descending silence as they fall asleep in the minibus on the way home from a day out at the Viking VGS.

Never had that on the way back from a day at the AEF !!

Arc

ACW599

22nd Mar 2016, 10:38

One of my erstwhile VGS colleagues once observed that watching other people fly was rather like watching other people have sex -- mildly interesting but not remotely involving.

CoffmanStarter

22nd Mar 2016, 14:31

From the Government eMail response sent to all petitioners today and posted by BEagle

combined with an increase of an extra 25 Grob Tutor fixed wing Air Experience Flights (AEFs) – a more than 50% increase on previous flights.

Clearly whoever wrote the original note, didn't proofread it ... I'm assuming it's a typo ... otherwise we will have more AEF's than Front Line Squadrons :\

BEagle, Airbus38 ...

If the MOD, 2FTS and the ACO continue to incorrectly describe these PTT's as 'Realistic Flight Simulators' ... then the remedy is simple ... such devices come under the jurisdiction of the MAA.

MAA : RA 2375 - Approval and Use of Flight Simulator Training Devices

Flight Simulators vary considerably in fidelity. They may be used as either preparation or substitution for live sorties in UK Military Aircraft. Their use must not prejudice the safe operation of that aircraft. Therefore, careful consideration is required to ensure the simulator is fit for purpose.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/350180/RA2375.pdf

Specifically noting the requirement Point 3 ...

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/Screen%20Shot%202016-03-22%20at%2013.45.48_zpsmtrdqbm0.png

I suspect the phrase PTT (although apparently not defined by the MAA) has been deliberately used as training terminology by 2FTS. But given the involvement of 'minors' in formal flying training ... I believe a TNA should be undertaken (if not already done so) and the Viking & Vigilant PTT's assessed by a QintiQ TP against those TNA's, as it may well then be appropriate to DE-FUNCTION some of the PTT's attributes to protect against the real risk of 'NEGATIVE training' as outlined by BEagle. Then (I assume ?) 22 Group will need to 'approve' a Training Course/Cadet Gliding Qualification specifying exactly what level/type of 'synthetic' training is permissible (if any) during Cadet Glider Training/Qualification.

NB. To be read in conjunction with Posts #1923 by Airbus38 and #1976 by BEagle

Arclite01

22nd Mar 2016, 14:58

Another thought.........

If the additional Tutors had not been available as a result of the reduced BFT requirement what would they have done for the additional AEF Capacity which is being touted as such a great increase as part of this deal ??

I am assuming that there would have just been cuts to VGS and no 'sweetner' (if that is what it is) of increased AEF.............

Arc

Subsunk

22nd Mar 2016, 19:02

The Grob Tutor is likely to be replaced with the Grob 120TP Prefect, a higher-performance aircraft with retractable undercarriage and a turboprop engine, under the future Ascent contract.

Given this aircraft's complexities, I think the exam question regarding this proposed uplift in powered AEF flying is 'When is the out of service date of the Grob Tutor in AEF and UAS service?'

POBJOY

22nd Mar 2016, 19:33

Full of 'non statements' and more misleading ones,bordering on untruths.
Just three of the contents are enlightening.

Air Cadet Flying will be safer:- How does it get safer than the actual historical VERY SAFE !

Relalistic synthetic flight simulation :- They are at the most 'procedure trainers' which are neither Realistic or simulate flight. In the case of the Vig their use 'would' have been for 'drills' (but no Vig's!!) The Vikings have no 'systems' that need this.

Value for Money:- They are having a laugh here, Amount of Cadet training will diminish (on top of that already lost forever).No evidence that there will be more flying at less cost.

To be fair the use of the PTtrainers at Cadet Squadrons as opposed to VGS sites will at least give some 'flavour' of aviation that may stimulate ongoing interest to the very young.

brokenlink

22nd Mar 2016, 20:19

From my perspective I would be interested to know:

What happened to the monitoring of the original contract?
Was that sufficiently robust with the correct Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in place. If not why not?
What money has been recovered from the original contractor for failure to deliver, this could then offset some of return to flight costs.

Following the grounding why did it take 2years to get anything moving? It only took 3 years or so to get an availability contract in place for the dear old VC10! Sure there were challenges, but all parties worked together to overcome them on a vastly more complicated aircraft.

I might as well drop these questions to my MP, he has served on the PAC for a number of years and would be well versed in taking these questions forward.

CoffmanStarter

22nd Mar 2016, 20:54

c4aero ...

Welcome to you ...

I'm still mystified as to who will fly the upscaled Tutor AEF Fleet. I seem to recall that the AEF Flying Order Book (Chipmunk Days ... many years ago) made reference to the fact that only RAF and RN Pilots could be considered for AEF Cadet Flying Duties. Noting that Army Pilots could be considered based on their individual Fixed Wing experience. So as not to upset anyone of a khaki persuasion ... I believe this 'restriction' was connected with the 'truncated' Chipmunk syllabus designed at the time to get the aspiring Army pilot solo on fixed wing ASAP to then be followed by intensive rotary training to wings standard.

I also recall that the other primary driver was to have a serving/retired Military Pilot so as to "instil a military ethos' into the overall AEF experience.

Given the (sadly) reduced size of the RAF, RN and Army these days and known current shortages of AEF pilots ... Where are the additional aircrew to come from ?

I note the reference in the various briefing papers issued to date the 'possibility' of 'some' Vigilant QGI's converting ... if genuinely true, how realistic is this ?

Thank you ...

PS. Other 'Gems' from the old Chipmunk AEF Flying Order Book ... 'At the OC AEF's discretion, Cadets holding a Flying Scholarship qualification and in possession of a valid/current PPL, could occupy the Front Seat' (designed to hep FS Cadets keep their PPL's current ... If I remember correctly the Cadet recorded P1/s with the OC counter signing the Civilian Logbook which was acceptable to the CAA) ... The OC AEF was then invariably a QFI and could operate from the boot ... If only to check-out his staff.

VX275

22nd Mar 2016, 21:45

The requirements/process of converting the Vigilant to the Tutor has been put to the VGS staff. However, the process dosen't appear to have been throught through properly as it appears that they had forgotten there are a number of Vigilant instructors who are serving RAF NCO, junior ones at that. Could this see the RAF finally having Corporal pilots like the AAC?

CoffmanStarter

22nd Mar 2016, 21:56

OK VX275 ... Let's hear from c4aero :ok:

LlamaFarmer

22nd Mar 2016, 23:41

POBJOY

Whilst I think what has happened to Air Cadet gliding is completely unacceptable and indefensible, I'm not sure I agree with you on the procedural trainers.

Whilst I don't expect them to be much more than a glider mockup with a big screen/projector, they could be both useful and interesting to the cadets (although not as interesting as actual flying).

Certainly 20 minutes on this could introduce the effects of controls in all 3 axis, and save at least one 5-minute Viking launch. Not that I am suggesting reducing the number of launches for each GIC, but the launch "saved" could be used for more productive practice with the cadet at the controls, rather than the instructor at the controls demonstrating/explaining.

When it came to cadets on the GS, it would be useful to practice proper landing technique over and over, getting some degree of "muscle memory" for the round out/hold off. And cadets having problems with ballooning or bouncing could go back to the trainer for a number of landing attempts to nail the technique rather than wasting circuits.
20 landing attempts on a trainer might take 10 minutes to practice. They wouldn't let every cadet approaching solo with 'landing issues' have 20 launches in a day just to practice the landings, instead they'd give them their Blue wings and send them on their way home.

Used properly with a good instructor, it could mean many more people get to go solo who would otherwise have just ended up with Blue wings.

I remember the BGA had rather a good glider simulator (with very realistic aerodynamics computations, you could accurately stall and spin it). If each VGS got one of those then they would be very valuable in teaching not only cadets, but new volunteer staff.

Whilst it certainly doesn't replace real flight, a lot of time during gliding lessons is spent demonstrating and explaining, i.e. see it, do it. Make the most of a training device on the ground and the time in the air can be much more productive.

POBJOY

23rd Mar 2016, 00:41

Lama F
Unless a Glider simulator has motion and 'feel' it will not replicate the required handling that is required for landing,and as gliders do not have a vast array of flight, nav, and engine instrumentation there is little value in using them in conjunction with the actual flying training.
Slightly different with the Vig with the extra systems,but then these seem to be history now.
However as mentioned i do see the value to have even a simple 'trainer' available to Cadet Squadrons to raise awareness of aviation and promote 'flying training' that will be available when they are old enough to progress through whatever system is left. It may be that the age limit for solo is reduced to the BGA requirement which could be great for keeping the young starters (poss 12 year olds) enthused as they see the goal posts getting closer,rather than 4 years away.
The whole point about basic glider training was it gave an opportunity for 'anyone' to get hands on experience with a real flying machine in a controlled safe environment that also developed self confidence and decision making.As an exercise in that alone combined with the required team effort it has no equal and provided a basis for ongoing useful flying practices that were still relevant in this digital world(Space shuttle).What could be better 'value for money' than a Cadet getting his BGA A&B badge with so little air time,again this has no equal,and certainly will never be repeated.Going down to one solo was a real cop out and i never understood why it had to be.