AAC Scandal [Archive] - PPRuNe Forums

solotk

21st Jun 2002, 17:05

What happened to the recent story about the Army QHI/WO1 allegedly fiddling the auth sheets? This is the first controversial thread on this forum for a long time.

I imagine it was ppruned, before the accused QHI/WO1 got on to his legal team. The original post did sound a bit sour, and was there any need to mention the guys' Corps, or was that to emphasise that red-arses have no place in helicopters?

The attack was very very personal, and I don't think belonged on a public forum, a more appropriate place would have been a formal C.O's interview and complaint.

Or is it just sour grapes? It might be a coincidence, but I didn't see the Light-Blue Beret contingent, rushing to get involved in that thread, did you?

Tony

Jeep

22nd Jun 2002, 14:03

uwchporfa:

Why don't you email me old chap, then we can discuss missing authsheets. Or is it true what they say about pilots that fly your aircraft type?

.... or you could just gamble that your ID is a secret.

E3scumbag

22nd Jun 2002, 16:59

Jeep,

I think I know who you think that is, but in my opinion, for what it's worth, I think you're wrong. He admitted patronage of this site before and i don't think he'd hide again, he's bigger than that.

I think the more important question, or one of them is why is the AAC transferring WO1's regardless of background or their sharp pencilling skills. Surely if a big badge holder is of the correct calibre they should be applying for a commission in the wonderful anti admin corps, thus leaving us mere mortals with an opportunity to bring experience and also give the corps a few years before going onto LSL/continuance. I say at this point, Rank does not necessarily bring experience, unless you want to look up peoples bottoms with a fine tooth comb.

Here's a thing, there are some very capable, experienced NCO's/SNCO Pilots/Commanders (and, granted some not so !) on their last chance to apply for transfer. There are, as we are more than aware, a limited number of transfer places available. Why then transfer WO's who have a very limited number of years left, not as many as the time bar is for in some cases and, may then go on in subsequent years to apply for a commission, thus having taken a transfer slot from someone who can now no longer apply.

Discuss
:)
Is it scandal or just scandalous ?

mutleyfour

22nd Jun 2002, 20:05

Dont mean to be cliche!

"Its not what you know but who you know";)

BOMBS

24th Jun 2002, 21:00

Looked at the original story (inditment for war crimes) it made for intresting reading, let's just hope that they haven't tracked the writer down. It could get a bit sad........

canberra

25th Jun 2002, 11:18

could someone please tell me(an ex crab) what is a redarse? and this site mentions missing auth sheets, do the aac not do the same as the raf and do them in duplicate?

Hydraulic Palm Tree

25th Jun 2002, 11:57

The RAF do not do auth sheets in duplicate, certainly not the SH Force anyway.

HPT

solotk

25th Jun 2002, 16:19

Canberra.....
Redarse is a member of RMP or Royal Military Police. It refers to the red band around the cap I presume :)

Tony

sony_man76

25th Jun 2002, 17:47

SLOTK, Not one to sound Condescending or anything like that but if your going to post a reply, surely the facts should be correct? 'REDARSE' is actually a name given to new recruits in the Army from the experienced.

canberra

25th Jun 2002, 18:00

the sh force may not do the auth sheets in duplicate, but in my 23 years i never saw auth sheets not done in duplicate! maybe the sh force is out of step. also i always knew the rmp as monkeys.

solotk

25th Jun 2002, 18:12

Looks like we have a crossover then Sony...

I've certainly heard them referred to as REDARSE and REDMONKEYS and a whole bunch of other stuff not suitable for publication. Which seems to be the low regard they are held in, right up until the point you need one.

Recruits tend to get referred to as "NIGS" from "New Guy in Germany" I believe , but it seems to have stuck to any recruit, "NUMPTIES" and "F*KWITS" seem popular as well.Oddly enough, I've never referred to a recruit as a "REDARSE" , but females do get referred to as "SPLITARSES", god alone knows why.

Slang will vary from Regiment to Regiment to Corps etc. Some items of slang are universal in the Forces, some unique to a certain group of people.

Service slang, is an ever evolving language, I'm sure I'd recognise very little of my fathers' slang :)

Tony

canberra

25th Jun 2002, 18:21

and who do you think your calling sonny!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i stopped being called that when i left school in 1978.

buvenbee-hind

25th Jun 2002, 18:22

i've only ever heard the term redarse in reference to a new boy, never a RMP :p

solotk

25th Jun 2002, 18:35

Sorry Canberra, it was "SONY" as in Sony_Man" not Sonny -lol

First time I heard an RMP referred to as a "Red Arse" was on a Brigade EX on Sennybridge ,when they were doing route marking. My driver was banging on remorseless about "f'ing redarses" just cos they got a f'ing stripe for turning up , etc etc etc", and he knew umpteen better routes to get to the RV, and didn't anyone ever teach these f'ing redarses how to read a map, you get the picture.

I've since heard it used to describe RMP's but perhaps it's one of those words not in general usage to describe the Bobby end of the Army?

BEagle

25th Jun 2002, 19:05

Canberra - I think that you'll find that most units stopped the practice of carbon copy Flight Authorisation Sheets with the introduction of the photocopier.......

high spirits

25th Jun 2002, 19:33

Canberra,
HPT is right. SH auth is done on computer(just to confuse those one-fingered numpty typists such as me), and then printed off and signed. Duplicate therefore exists on hard drive. All very well until your stn power goes down, and then we go back to the dark ages of carbon copy sheets....

E3scumbag

25th Jun 2002, 19:36

16 replies golly i thought, there must be a lot of interest in the topic. No, just a load of (ex) crabs arguing about duplicate, or not auth sheets and the correct slang name for the RMP. I believe Monkey is the correct term. Red Cap, but never Red Arse, that is in my limited time as a pongo, then again as no-one associates with them, who cares what you call them.
Am I allowed to use the phrase golly ?

Sloppy Link

25th Jun 2002, 20:00

Solotk

The band around the cap is in fact a very deep blue to the point of almost being black. The area above the band is red, this goes back to the days of the Great War when, to identify Military Policemen to Commanders and as an indication that the man in question was on duty, a red cover was worn over the standard issue khaki cap. This continued to the Second World War and beyond until the introduction of the red beret in the early seventies with units in NI being the first to adopt them. They remained in use by the RMP Mounted Troop stationed in Aldershot until its disbandment in the nineties and the khaki cap with a red cover is now no longer worn. The No1 Dress Forage Cap is still used and not to be confused with the former in that has a black polished peak and chinstrap, a blue band as described and the remaining portion is red. So there!

Those budding detectives amongst you out there have probably worked out who I am now.....D'Oh!

solotk

25th Jun 2002, 21:12

No, I have no idea Sloppy mate.

I'm only sitting to attention just in case :( lol

Jeep

25th Jun 2002, 21:36

E3scumbag:

An appropriate nickname, and certainly different from the usual 'gastarbeiter' or 'mongrel' that I have heard before. Anyway to your point.

The AAC invite other arm soldiers, officers and even other service chappies to apply for pilot selection, with a view to infecting, er I mean injecting the AAC with military experience and thereby tapping the vast pool of talent the rest of the Army/Services has to offer, in recognition that many potential Army aviators out there. Army aviators are made up of direct entry officers, enlisted AAC soldiers, E3 officers and other ranks, and surely that mixture is one of the reasons Army Aviation is successful and as colourful as it is.

In my short time with the AAC I have seen an RAF busdriver, female Cpl TA, SAS soldiers, cooks, bandsmen and even a draughtsman or two not only apply for selection but successfully pass the Army pilots course. All bring something to the party. Thankfully once they have completed a tour, not all are sent back, but each can apply for transfer. The transfer system is simple, with good confidentials, good form 2/3 reports, they are thrown at the mercy of a board and some, are successful; not all, because some are not good enough, and some are not needed.

What it has to do with rank is absolutely naff all. It is hardly the fault of the soldier/officer what rank they are, when the selection process loads them for a course and spits them out as a pilot. What kind of system would it be that callously takes 18 - 24 months to train a pilot, 2 year frontline minimum and then send them back without the chance at transfer?

As a true blue AAC chap myself, I have had many E3 aircrew take my rightful postings/promotions and cushy appointments. However, I am rather proud of the fact that the AAC is so equal opportunity in that respect. Once within the Army Aviation family, and particularly once transferred, everyone is treated on a level playing field. What other arm/regiment, even service would allow outsiders/newboys such a luxury?

E3, you sound like one of them chaps that enjoys the level playing field you have been given, but want to make it less level for others. One of them chaps that looks at the results of a board and complains about some of the names you see, probably because of some personal incident between you and the individual over the years. Thank goodness for the AAC boarding system, not perfect, but at least it has kosher transparancy.

Oh and for your information, uwchporfa is exactly who I think he/she is.

Devildawg:

As the QHI in question (as per the original thread), uwchporfa accused me of not only badly interpreting JSP318 rules, but of making auth sheets disappear. At no point did he/she accuse me of altering them.

BEagle

26th Jun 2002, 05:38

2 years' training for 2 year's service? That sounds a really cost-effective way of doing things! Not.

Or is it just that Bwigadier Woopert of the Wedgiment doesn't consider that his chaps doing more than 2 years in the Corps to be conducive to 'pwoper soldierwing'......

BlueEagle

26th Jun 2002, 06:10

More moons back than I care to remember, (well 1967 actually), I came to the end of my first three year flying tour and was asked if I would like a second tour, "yes please", I replied, "but what about future promotion prospects?"
"If he wants further promotion he will have to go back and do another regimental tour first", came the answer from my parent corps.
At that time the Army had almost more aircraft than pilots but there was no way the AAC could promote me, the authority had to come from parent corps, who stuck to their guns.
Net result the Army lost one trained pilot with three years unit experience who wanted to stay in and fly! (at that time to transfer to the permanent cadre of the AAC one had to be a QHI).

Nothing seems to have changed that much!:(

E3scumbag

26th Jun 2002, 09:48

Jeep,
Thanks for the vote of thanks for the name, I thought long and hard about that. Probably longer and harder than the board to select the transferee's.

You are more than correct, I did the age-old pastime of viewing the transfer board results and said the immortal words, how did he get it, why did he/she not get it. It is the same sport that is carried out across every corps/arm when the promotion board is released every year.

Thanks for the info about the training and selection, funnily enough i was aware of it already. I think you will find my point about who transfers was pretty similar to yours, I agree that the corps is better off, on the whole, for the people that transfer in, not so sure what the point of the RAF bowser mong was, as he transferred and then left PDQ afterwards, and i don't know if you have ever spent 24 hours on duty with him, I like the guy, but it was painful to say the least.
It WOULD be a callous system to take 18 - 24 months etc.... and not allow them a chance to transfer, but that is becoming the case more and more, we have the chance, a very limited one. I was witness to a brief last year that simply put said, we have enough now and it isn't likely to change in the next 5 years, thankyou, you can apply but don't hold your breath. We still seem to be filling up from the bottom and allowing people with the avation experience to return back to bending spanners, or cloud punching.
Whilst i recognise the fact that the supply and demand of new pilots is difficult to forecast and it changes as quickly as the delivery date for the first line regiments AH, it does seem that we are still throwing pilots through the course, albeit with a massive delay in the middle. All this without keeping the manpower with the aviation experience, by not allowing transfer and sending people back. I also recognise that some people are just not what the AAC want and therefore are not likely to transfer, surely this is then up to there line manager to point this out to them.
I know people can apply for a subsequent flying tour, thankfully. This then leaves the problem of promotion by your own branch or arm. This case may have been in the past to go back to your own arm, get promoted then reapply for a further tour, I am not convinced that you would be allowed to come back now after 2 -3 years away, when the AAC claims to have no shortage of pilots.
The whole shortage thing is another thread entirely, I just wish i had time to write it !

I still think you are wrong, as I am sure whatshisface is a little fuller in the figure or should I say operates your preferred aircraft type.
:)

The Cryptkeeper

26th Jun 2002, 17:16

I must say I agree with E3 in principle - it certainly isn't so black and white as Jeep makes out (good confidentials, Form 2s and 3s etc) - I was also at the brief where Manning and Records (God bless 'em!) said, particularly to E3 officers, that the AAC was not looking to transfer many people in the next 5 years. I don't think the left hand knows what the right hand is doing half the time anyway!!!

Eight Eights Blue

27th Jun 2002, 22:56

Gentlemen Aviators,

All this tit for tat about transfers is a load of codsWALLOP. The AAC are canny and ruthless, that is why they won't badge you straight away. they give you 3 years to prove yourself and if you ain't good enough then it is Arreverderchi. I have flown with lots of peeps and it is true when people say,
"How the hell did they get through Middle Wallop."
Well that question remains unanswered but they do, that is why after three years when their true colours are identified they are sent back to whatever they were probably better at. In my case I was obviously better at flying coz I was transferred at the first attempt and then subsequently promoted by the AAC.

For those of you with difficulty in slang terms I have identifled a few for you below:

REDCAP----RMP (Royal Military Policeman/woman) it was on the telly
SNOWDROP----Person who believes that he has the power of a policeman. Usually seen on gate sentry at most RAF bases.
BLEEP----Royal Signals Personnel
TOMS----Private Soldiers
GODS----LYNX PILOTS
FLOPPIES----Gazelles or Gazelle Pilots
CRABS----Annoying creatures that walk sideways and strut around the beaches with pompous attitudes. Also associated with the Royal Air Force
GROUNDIES----Personnel who push and pull and refuel cabs and get no recognition for it
AAC----An organisation that is proud of its history, works all the hours that god sends without complaining, always produces the goods when it is needed, nuff said.

Scud-U-Like

29th Jun 2002, 00:20

Eight Eights Blue

Very enlightening slang terms, me old.

But shouldn't it read:

REDCAP----RMP: love 'em or hate 'em, you know you need 'em.
SNOWDROP----That guy from Flying Complaints who keeps your arse out of the mire.
BLEEP----"MAYDAY MAYDAY" (thank fcuk for the Royal Signals)
TOMS----Backbone of the British Army
GODS----Admirals, generals and air marshals (yes, I know it hurts to say it)
FLOPPIES----Servicemen (any rank, any branch) after 6 pints
CRABS----Those with their feet on the ground
GROUNDIES----Personnel who push and pull and refuel cabs and get lots of recognition from those who care to give it
AAC---An organisation with certain individuals who are full of their own self-importance

:D

The Pilgrim

29th Jun 2002, 07:23

Jeep, ur spot on albeit slightly grovelly! The person that started this thread (initially) wants his a** kicking. Sounds like somebody who is full of his own self importance. Probably one of those types who has only ever flown one aircraft type, always in the same theatre and been there for ages, do yourself and your corps a favour and move him on!!!

HectorusRex

29th Jun 2002, 09:38

From my recollection of some 50 years ago, Army Military Police were referred to as "Rock Apes", and RAF MP's were "Snow Drops", and not to their face either!:D

Sloppy Link

29th Jun 2002, 16:02

HR

Rock Apes is a term of endearment for the RAF Regiment.

Monkeys are the RMP or perhaps they were the CMP (they changed from Corps to Royal in 1945) when you knew them. The origin of both terms is not known but one explanation for the RMP being called Monkey's is that by lore, the day the baboons leave the Rock of Gibraltar, it will no longer be British. To ensure this never happens, in days of old, it was the job of the Provost Sergeant to feed them so they would stay. It seems to have worked up to now but nobody reckoned on President Blair and his policy of European appeasment.

Another explanation is during the days of a conscript Army, CMP/RMP of a robust nature were needed to control unruly soldiers. These men were not the sharpest tools in the box and henceforth were known as Monkeys because of their intelect.

Personally, I prefer the first explanation.

HectorusRex

29th Jun 2002, 22:47

Sloppy Link, I sit corrected!
Not just the eyesight going.:rolleyes:

Yonez

5th Jul 2002, 23:17

JEEP.

Sorry mate but this level playing field you keep refering to doesn't actually exsist. I don't know how long its been since you spent any time in the company of E3's but it sounds to me like its been a while. Too long at Wallop maybe. How many E3 QHI's do you know?
And it does have a lot to do with rank.
Why would the AAC transfer a SNCO AC Comd with a few hrs experience on 2nd or 3rd tour flying pay, hes going nowhere. It obviously makes sense to them to transfer the Cpl with 500 hrs and 12 years to do, who ,after finding out what a cake & a**e party he,s invited himself to, may decide to throw in his hand and go back to an outfit that recognises his potential at his job and not his ability to kiss a**e.
And when it comes to postings/promotions + cushy appts only an a**e would say they were rightfully his.
Who knows, you probably got mine! ;)

bandicoot

6th Jul 2002, 11:20

Sorry but I appear to have lost the thread............

Should this not be renamed - 'the Rogets Thesaurus entry for RMP/Snowdrop'?

If not the original thread has, some what been lost :rolleyes:

timex

6th Jul 2002, 15:34

Yonez, sorry got interrupted........ just finished with the AAC on a "short" tour and JEEP has a pretty good idea what he is talking about. Just a few things I noticed. E3 guys all managed to transfer, none wanted to go back to previous units . AND it wasn't just Offrs/SNCOs or JNCOs it was across the board.

bandicoot

6th Jul 2002, 16:28

timex,

Alas, not all E3 got transfered this year - though I think the majority (misguided fools) wanted to.

I think 5 regt in NI did the best of the lot - but I reckon it will be the usual 'bun fight' to get across in the future.

Still who cares! - so long as there are plenty of bums on seats - on paper at least - the corps can afford to let experience walk out of the door.

Or is that answer B !:rolleyes:

timex

6th Jul 2002, 19:58

Bandicoot, totally agree. Sad thing is the AAC relies on the vast amount of external experience to boost it,s own. To lose this will always be a shame. Sadly others make the decisions, however bad!!

Beaver

6th Jul 2002, 22:04

As an ex member, I feel qualified to reply!

Although this thread has gone slightly 'off mesage' from the initial post I feel the following might be of value :-

Don't delude yourself that the AAC cares about your career progression unless you are a Regular Officer. The rest are just numbers, regardless of how important you think you are as a QHI or vastly experienced E3 officer - you are just a peg in the appointers board! Make no mistake this is an organisation run by Regular Officers for the benefit of Regular Officers! Believe me, SNCO pilots (and I was one) mean nothing, Reg C (LE) officers (and I was one) mean nothing - the sooner you chaps catch on and start looking after No 1 the better you will be! We do ourselves no favours accepting piecemeal extensions just to alleviate short-term shortages in manning to be cast aside at the next surplus. (Not my own personal experience, I'll admit!). By accepting these you are the appointers dream!

Get out, get a licence, get a life!!

Oh I See

6th Jul 2002, 22:13

Such a shame you AAC & RM SNCO pilots were so highly thought of that the crab OASC snatched up anything that came their way. The guys the AAC and RM kept must be laughing their socks off!!:mad:

Always_broken_in_wilts

6th Jul 2002, 23:17

I am a bit confusd.......are you actually saying that the AAC is manned by non proffesional aircrew?

Do guys actually only serve one productive tour then go back to being a soldier?

How cost effective is this?

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

:p :p :p .................:D

Jeep

7th Jul 2002, 03:59

Yonez:

I last served in MW some 3.5 years ago, and I have very recently been in the presence of E3 hired_help/gurkhas. I hope I dont have to know too many non AAC capbadged QHI, but I am sure one or two will scrape on through. If you havent been transfered by the time you get onto a QHI course then you might not be the best piece of chalk in the box, and if you have got onto a QHI course before transfer, then perhaps you have gotten onto the course before you should have. I stand by my original comments, the AAC boarding system, although not faultless, is about as fair a system as you might hope to have.

Always BIW:

The AAC is manned by proffesional aircrew, the same as the airfarce and the FAA. It is rare for a pilot to do one tour and go back to their original unit, but not unheard of. How many rotary airfarce pilots, take 3 - 5+ years to graduate to front line, then do only one tour and bang out? I suspect all three services have the same loss rate/value for money.

Green Bottle

7th Jul 2002, 09:22

RAF Rotary pilots have to do 6 years post first OCU before they are allowed to leave. Additionally they have to do 3 years post subsequent OCUs before they are allowed to leave. Therefore you get a min of 6 years productive service from RAF pilots.

Fortyodd

7th Jul 2002, 21:47

Wondered how long it would be before the slaging match started!!;)

rediscoveredoriginal

8th Jul 2002, 17:49

I don't think I've ever seen a level playing field.
There've always been great mountains in mine. And when I slog up to the top, there's a ruddy great cliff...which I fall off...into a huge cowpat!

Muff Coupling

8th Jul 2002, 20:43

Glad to see the great tradition of PPRUNErs is alive and well..ending up miles off thread. But never one to break tradition..here goes.

As an outsider to the AAC, I do not feel fully qual to comment in depth about E3 etc, etc, but a JHC matey is and keeps me in the know(ish!)

I believe you (AAC & E3 Types) are just going through the pains of restructuring for AH. It is really a case of numbers and requirement. Much the same for all 3 services on intro of new aircraft or structure, etc. FAA going through complete Trade Review for aircraft techs to meet new SHAR / GR9 structure (2 x RN Heavy and 2 x RAF Heavy units) for example.

Fact- the AAC aircraft state is to reduce by 100 odd frames.-Result less pilots required. Fact - need to keep permanent cadre employed to terms of service- Result less other arms (NCO or Officer) required. Indeed, expect very few other arms to be selected for training over next few years. About 3-4 Officers and about the same for NCOs. Those currently in and flying can expect fair chance to re-cap badge (mainly NCOs) until full pilot and LE officer manning is achieved for new AH establishments.
About 04 / 05, then expect tap to turn off. Fact - requirement driven. Nothing really to do with boards and such like, they just sit to justify and officialise pre-empted decisions on numbers and requirment e.g. QHIs needed for AH programme. Not a black art.

On the LE side it is again requirement driven. Loads of DE short to fill desk jobs-accelerate young lads to go out into wider Army (bear in mind that is what they were recruited for!) and make up the internal jobs with LE. Add need to fill new AH establishments..hey presto, good odds of picking up a SSC LE.

But Health Warning, as Beaver points out..look after number one. If the AAC becomes overborne lots of LE to polyfill these gaps and by chance DE types elect to stay (FRI, command an AH Sqn, become Comd 16 AAB for example), the new establishments get filled..many who hang their lives on staying to 55 (REG C LE, Maj pension, get on the PA spine etc) are going to be very disapointed:eek: :eek: 6 years and a Capts pension for you my boy! Loadshedding will become the order of the day.

By the way I understand the AAC have similar terms as RAF Rotary as Green Bottle points out. 4 years post CTT...but we all know about Time Bars then!

Jeep makes a good point..ALL military aviators are proffessionals. There mere fact some decide to take one tour and say "Thanks for the experience" is hardly cause for high blood pressure, if the training budget allows. Which, for the Army it appears it does.

What about these auth sheets then?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: