Discrimination and Prejudice alive and well in the RAF

[Baldeep Inminj]

The following email was recently leaked to the Press, and highlights the disgusting and inexcusable prejudice that still festers in the RAF. What have 'White Males' done to deserve this? If I was a serving White Male pilot (I am an 'ex' one), I would be so disillusioned with the RAF's opinion of me as being unworthy of representing the Organization that I fight for.

I copied the email from LinkedIn, but it can be found on myriad sites. No reply from CAS though...

Truly Shameful.

https://media-exp1.licdn.com/dms/image/C4E22AQH-iPOh_xD5NQ/feedshare-shrink_800/0/1651384688750?e=2147483647&v=beta&t=uvBsm8mALYQIoZQsXDpP3wam0ufp85hvzjBpVy0ly70

[vascodegama]

Pronoun use is poor as well.

[rudestuff]

Sarah should be ashamed of himself.

[Timelord]

Good to know that with a war in Europe, and the operational parts of the RAF being pretty busy as a result , someone is worrying about the important stuff.
,

[alfred_the_great]

The following email was recently leaked to the Press, and highlights the disgusting and inexcusable prejudice that still festers in the RAF. What have 'White Males' done to deserve this? If I was a serving White Male pilot (I am an 'ex' one), I would be so disillusioned with the RAF's opinion of me as being unworthy of representing the Organization that I fight for.

I copied the email from LinkedIn, but it can be found on myriad sites. No reply from CAS though...

Truly Shameful.

https://media-exp1.licdn.com/dms/image/C4E22AQH-iPOh_xD5NQ/feedshare-shrink_800/0/1651384688750?e=2147483647&v=beta&t=uvBsm8mALYQIoZQsXDpP3wam0ufp85hvzjBpVy0ly70

well, on the plus side, if you Google “raf pilot” on an image search, you get pages and pages of white males. So feel free to take your snowflake self to any of those pictures…

[NutLoose]

Sigh, still using Pilots as the face of the RAF when it is a team effort..

[Ken Scott]

Sigh, still using Pilots as the face of the RAF when it is a team effort..

Nutloose, you know it’s all about pilots…!! (Well, the film anyway).

[reds & greens]

So glad I came out (wish I hadn't said that) in 2013.
on the outside, looking in, it's shameful.

[MPN11]

Pilots … it was ever thus. That’s all The Public know. Whenever I say I was in the RAF, the immediate response is “Were you a Pilot?” … and the lights dim when I say “No”. Now I don’t even mention my irrelevant 30 years of commissioned service: I just enjoy the Pension, as does my Admin (Sec) OH.

As for the Tweet … V.O.M.I.T. 🤮

[Marly Lite]

Baldeep. Indeed. This is the racist sexist coddswallop those serving have to put up with. Did a whole day of listening to some idiot from High Wycombe the other day, implying that white males were the root of all evil, whilst letting loose that she had joined the airforce under fraudulent terms and was gaining a comission without undertaking any oficer training.
https://media-exp1.licdn.com/dms/image/C4E22AQH-iPOh_xD5NQ/feedshare-shrink_800/0/1651384688750?e=2147483647&v=beta&t=uvBsm8mALYQIoZQsXDpP3wam0ufp85hvzjBpVy0ly70[/QUOTE]

[ORAC]

Discrimination and prejudice - because so few male white pilots achieve high rank in the RAF…

[BEagle]

I'm surprised that even Wiggy the Woke would allow some claptrap like that to appear in print. Sarah, you need to tell the 'Air Media and Communications Project Manager' that such nonsense simply won't wash.

Even though I'm long out of the Service, I came across this woke 'inclusivity' rubbish recently from an Air Officer. I should have told him of the words of a senior officer many years ago "I don't go along with this pathetic political correctness - in my day we just wanted to join the RAF to fly green aeroplanes which kill people!".

Anyone volunteering to be the 'RAF face' for Top Gun: Maverick (do get the title correct!) would surely never live it down afterwards!

[ICATQ]

Although I am a white, male, spanner chucker, I self-identify as a non-white, non-specific gender, pilot. Do I get the job?

[minigundiplomat]

I'm surprised that even Wiggy the Woke would allow some claptrap like that to appear in print. Sarah, you need to tell the 'Air Media and Communications Project Manager' that such nonsense simply won't wash.

Even though I'm long out of the Service, I came across this woke 'inclusivity' rubbish recently from an Air Officer. I should have told him of the words of a senior officer many years ago "I don't go along with this pathetic political correctness - in my day we just wanted to join the RAF to fly green aeroplanes which kill people!".

Anyone volunteering to be the 'RAF face' for Top Gun: Maverick (do get the title correct!) would surely never live it down afterwards!

i’m in agreement with Beagle - not sure which one of us will be more shocked.

[Barksdale Boy]

I reckon BEagle's last sentence hits the nail squarely on the head.

[Bob Viking]

Whilst I pray the email is a wind-up I find it as unsurprising as it is unpleasant.

There’s not really much else to say.

Nutloose, whilst I hear where you’re coming from with your ‘one team, one fight’ viewpoint I think, for a Topgun related event, I’m sure even you must concede that a pilot (RN vs RAF debate aside) is probably required.

BV

[Old-Duffer]

57 years ago, a friend appeared as a pilot in the advertisement: " A week in the life of ????? - RAF pilot" - he still gets reminded of it.

Any person tempted to apply for the latest rubbish should think again - if white was selected, they would never live it down and if they are of a different hue, would also find themselves embarrassed. Perhaps a cardboard mockup of aircrew of different colour and gender would actually show the 'Sarah' to find another job! Silly arse!

Old Duffer
(White , straight male, unreconstructed and no idea what pronouns are (GCE 'O' level english failed))

[HOVIS]

Why are the Air Force getting involved? Isn't this 'Naval Aviator' territory? 😁

[FantomZorbin]

At first I thought it was a wind-up ... alas FZjr, a serving officer, reports that the operational base where he is is well beyond the 'u-bend'. The Goon Show would have a field day. :mad:

[charliegolf]

Sarah gonna need a bigger boat, methinks. The OFC is so easily triggered.

CG

[Red Line Entry]

I disagree with the lot of you. Joe Public tends to think that an RAF pilot is indeed male and white - and that is, in the majority of cases, true. Consequently, we don't get, proportionally, sufficient applications from those who are not male and white. However, if we want to be the most effective, lethal, and capable force that we can be, then we need the best talent applying, regardless of gender, creed or colour. So it is entirely sensible to make an effort to get Joe Public to realise that we recruit wider than just white males. This (poorly worded) is part of the effort to do this.

So get the hell off the outrage bus, you antediluvian relics!

[charliegolf]

RedLine, you are Sarah, and I claim my £5 lol.

CG

[Red Line Entry]

Damn - Busted!

[SpamCanDriver]

I disagree with the lot of you. Joe Public tends to think that an RAF pilot is indeed male and white - and that is, in the majority of cases, true. Consequently, we don't get, proportionally, sufficient applications from those who are not male and white. However, if we want to be the most effective, lethal, and capable force that we can be, then we need the best talent applying, regardless of gender, creed or colour. So it is entirely sensible to make an effort to get Joe Public to realise that we recruit wider than just white males. This (poorly worded) is part of the effort to do this.

So get the hell off the outrage bus, you antediluvian relics!

I respectfully disagree.
If any other characteristics were used apart from "White" & "Male" this would of been rightly been slammed as discriminatory.
Do we see campaigns where female nurses & primary teachers are banned, to encourage more males into the profession for example?
I understand its PR, so the RAF are perfectly within their rights to select the person best suited to project the image they want.
But that should be done by selecting the best person for the job from the willing candidates, not by excluding specific groups.
Not to mention it completely undermines all the women who have worked their arses off to become a pilot in the RAF. By perpetuating the myth that women have been selected purely based on their sex, rather than their skill set.

Im all for ensuring that everyone has an equal chance at getting the role & encouraging more women into flying.
But discrimination is discrimination

Men & Women do generally have different interests and thus even given the same opportunities, there will always be imbalance in different professions.
Saying an organisation is inherently biased against one sex because there isn't a 50/50 M/F split, is simplistic nonsense

[Bob Viking]

I think you’ve missed the point of the outrage. I don’t think anybody cares who shows up at the event, although I think we can all agree that it will be a pilot.

The point is that discrimination is abhorrent in whatever form it takes. Openly discriminating against white males is no less shameful than discriminating against anyone else.

I am still standing by to find out that this was just a well played wind-up from someone with too much time on their hands though.

BV

[Ewan Whosearmy]

I disagree with the lot of you.<snip>

So get the hell off the outrage bus, you antediluvian relics!

Let me replay your argument back to you.

1. We want the best to apply, regardless of what they look like or what genitals they have
2. It's OK for the RAF to actively discriminate against - and be seen to be discriminating against - a demographic that comprises around 40% of the recruitment pool because they have the wrong colour skin and the wrong genitals

What you've generously characterised as "making an effort to get Joe Public to realise that we recruit wider than just white males" sounds very unwise to me unless what you really care about is equality of outcome?

[muppetofthenorth]

And this is why nobody under the age of 65 uses pprune.

[swh]

Sarah gonna need a bigger boat, methinks. The OFC is so easily triggered.

CG

Thought I saw a RAF 5th generation broom stick with the name Sarah on it.

[Red Line Entry]

It's clearly been a while since some people on this forum did their D&I training...
Seeking to engage with people who are not white and not male to promote employment in the RAF is not discrimination; it is positive action, which is legal under the Equality Act 2010. From Bristol University: (Linky (http://www.bristol.ac.uk/hr/resourcing/additionalguidance/equality/))The legislation encourages employers to take positive action to ensure they can recruit and retain people from under-represented groups as long as this does not mean less favourable treatment for other people. For instance:


Including statements encouraging applications from under-represented groups.
Targeting advertising to reach under-represented groups.

For a discrimination case to succeed, you would have to demonstrate (as a white, male pilot) that your inability to apply for this temporary activity resulted in a harm or disadvantage to yourself. Judging by some of the comments about the banter suffered following such 'fame', I think that it might be difficult to prove!!!

[Cat Techie]

And this is why nobody under the age of 65 uses pprune.


Wouldn't be a SAGA if that wasn't true! ;)

[Nil_Drift]

Bristol University ... I rest my case, m'Lud.

[Lima Juliet]

At the bottom of this post is a team that selects itself because it wants to have the very best chance of winning. There are no ‘quotas’, no ‘must reflect the make up of society’ and no ‘woke agendas’. The Armed Forces are the same, especially in a war-fighting role like Aircrew, where we pick a team with the best chance of winning regardless of what they look like. Can we imagine how badly we would do if we selected our 100m team on the basis of appearance rather than performance? Thankfully we don’t and the teams look like this because they are represented by the best that can be found in the UK…

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1600x1200/image_143111ee5f4f92b3cd998d37cc639df6b5cab1f6.jpeg

[MPN11]

I guess I’m largely blind to all this cr@p. Partly educated in Jamaica, as the only English boy in my boarding school. As an ATCO, worked with M/F and multiple ethnicities.

But Recruiting has its own imperatives, sadly. I had to work with J Walter Thompson to produce a new RAF ATC recruiting leaflet. That tried my patience!

[Red Line Entry]

Ah, some lovely views here:
I guess I’m largely blind to all this cr@p.
Can we imagine how badly we would do if we selected ... on the basis of appearance rather than performance?

Currently, 3.3% of the RAF is BAME (source at Linky (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-armed-forces-biannual-diversity-statistics-2021/uk-armed-forces-biannual-diversity-statistics-1-april-2021)), whereas across the UK population, 14% are BAME. So the fact is WE DO SELECT BY APPEARANCE - because too many BAME individuals who would be great in the RAF do not apply in the first place. Why don't they apply? Because they don't perceive themselves as welcome, they don't see any role models who look like them, and when they do see RAF pilots in the spotlight, they normally see someone who is white and male.

This is not about denigrating those of us who are white blokes (I'm one) - it's about making the effort to show that we want people from all backgrounds. Not because it's woke, but because it means we can then select the very best talent from those who do apply. And because then we can be better at doing that non-woke thing that we primarily exist for: killing the Queen's enemies!

[The Helpful Stacker]

How times have changed.

It wasn't that long ago that I was volunteered to take part in a Ethnic Minority Recruiting Event at RAF Cosford. "I" being a pretty bog standard white male...

​

[NutLoose]

Surely the simplest way and to be all inclusive pilot wise is to run the RAF TopGun advert something like this… no gender, no colour.. no race…


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1000x1000/image_5d42b5d9884f304955bf92eb54b01915b304041d.jpeg
x

[MPN11]

Fair call, Red Line Entry 👍

In an earlier life I was pleased to be able to write the letter saying our Branch (ATC) had NO female quota … unlike all the other Branch Sponsors who had responded to the query. We always took the best person for the job, regardless of the shape of the sweater.

And colour never came in to the debate … I worked with a controller mate of Caribbean origin who served in WW2. We had 2 with the same surname on the Unit, so one was known as xxx Blanc and the other as xxx Noir. And we all just got on with the job.

So perhaps, yes, we should advertise the incredible diversity and talent that certainly existed in my dinosaur days and (hopefully) still exists today.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

Ah, some lovely views here:



Currently, 3.3% of the RAF is BAME (source at Linky (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-armed-forces-biannual-diversity-statistics-2021/uk-armed-forces-biannual-diversity-statistics-1-april-2021)), whereas across the UK population, 14% are BAME. So the fact is WE DO SELECT BY APPEARANCE - because too many BAME individuals who would be great in the RAF do not apply in the first place. Why don't they apply? Because they don't perceive themselves as welcome, they don't see any role models who look like them, and when they do see RAF pilots in the spotlight, they normally see someone who is white and male.

This is not about denigrating those of us who are white blokes (I'm one) - it's about making the effort to show that we want people from all backgrounds. Not because it's woke, but because it means we can then select the very best talent from those who do apply. And because then we can be better at doing that non-woke thing that we primarily exist for: killing the Queen's enemies!
What this dude said. Sadly most don't get the concept of aiming to recruit representative to the population, to ensure you can choose the best but also a host of other moral reasons. They also don't seem to understand that targeted advertising can be a thing without discriminating at the selection process.

[Wensleydale]

15 years ago, the cover of The Officers' Bulletin" always had a picture of four junior officers on the front cover: the Army officer was female; the RAF Officer was black; and the two remaining officers, RN and Royal Marines, were white male. It was difficult to see which of these two was gay.

[MPN11]

The OH was a Recruiter and Schools Liaison. The system was colour-blind, but at one mainly black school the girls said they wouldn't join because they would have to wear tan tights! This was, of course, in the 70s … has the World moved on?

[The B Word]

What utter horse poo. WE DO NOT SELECT BY APPEARANCE - selection is via 5 things:

1. Application and being inside the required selection criteria (educational quals, age and fitness).
2. Computer Based Aptitude Testing (CBAT) that looks to select the very best that will likely pass the early stages of flying training. Some females claim that the test is white male biased - little do they know that the head psychologist that sets and runs the CBAT batteries is a female from a mixed heritage. So that kind of sinks that criticism.
3. Leadership exercises - the good old hangar exercises and some group/solo exercises.
4. Interview - normally about 20 minutes or so. There are males and females doing that and also from varied backgrounds.
5. Medical - check of medical fitness and also anthropology (ie. Body measurement) to ensure they fit in the Service’s aircraft.

So, the claim that they are selected on appearance is totally bogus.

Why do I think that we get fewer applying that are not white and male? Firstly, much of the ethnic minority are still allied to the countries that they or their parents came from - so for some they are still building an allegiance to serve (which will come). For some, their foreign cultures feel incompatible to what we ask Service Pers to do. Some suffer from poor education due to wider culture issues in the UK and how multi-ethnic integration has been stifled by not mixing the population (which can be seen in areas that are very much ethnically dominated above the national average, or vice-versa where the white population are well over represented). Some of the recent conflicts have seen some caught between their religious beliefs and where those conflicts have been fought (and probably discouraged by their religious leaders).

Like all things, you can’t force this. If you set up the right environment then they will come - females and multi-ethnic backgrounds. But if you force it too hard, then you just run the risk of upsetting just about everyone and putting lots off! Finally, like LJ hinted at, you won’t see every Profession reflecting society, that is plain daft, just like we are unlikely to see it reflected in the staff for midwifery, ethnic restaurants or beauty treatment. There are some jobs that are more attractive to certain groups of people.

[vascodegama]

The RAF figures are low but overall at 10% doesn’t look too bad to me. Out of interest I wonder how many BAME members are actually eligible to apply?

In my limited time in the service (33 years) some of the worst examples of intolerance (the only ones I saw) were between BAME and BAME.

By the way Mrs deG is BAME and hates the term.

[Lima Juliet]

Yup, as for ‘no role models’ - plenty of examples like from WW1 then the first black Pilot was Sergeant William Robinson Clarke who flew RE8s on the Western Front in 1917. In WW2 then there were many famous Officer Aircrew like Philip Ulric Cross DFC, Cy Grant, Johnny Smythe, Emanuel Adjeniyi Thomas, David Abiodun Oguntoye, Arthur Wint (not only a Pilot but also a Gold Medal winner in the London Olympics) and Errol Walton Barrow - there were many more less famous. Then more recently you have Trevor Edwards, ex-RAF Regt and later combat ready Jaguar Pilot. On the Jag fleet there was also a Jag QWI from Asian heritage (seen in many a poster and news article). We have the women of the ATA, then the RAFVR women pilots that received their full RAF Wings in 1952/1953. Then the first female Air Quartermaster, the first full-time RAF Aircrew to get combat ready, was Pat Magill (nee Howard) in the late 1960s and then became the first female officer Air Loadmaster in 1974. Then we have the continual intake of females into the Flying Branches (now Aircrew Profession) since 1989 onwards - with ‘firsts’ (many incorrectly) claimed by the RAF in massive PR releases.

So the role models are out there if you choose to look for them.

[The B Word]

PS. I should also add that many from multi-ethnic backgrounds do not have the residency or UK nationality requirements to hold the security clearances required too. Most aircraft types need DVs these days too - all Fast Jet and ISTAR types, and growing numbers of helos and transport aircraft. So that is another issue. Again, it will come, but having parents with non-UK passports or single-digit years of residency in the UK will stop many - as will criminal records should they be unfortunate to live in an area where such things are commonplace. Again, that is not for the Armed Forces to resolve as these are central Government policies that affect.

PPS. Just looked it up on the web. For a DV you should have resided in the United Kingdom for the 10 years immediately preceding your application but candidates with a minimum of 7 years will be considered. You must be a citizen of the United Kingdom since birth and must not hold (and must never have held) any other nationality or citizenship (including joint nationality) with the exception of dual British Irish citizens. So if you have parents that have registered you for dual citizenship as they hold foreign passports then that will cause recruitment issues.

[cynicalint]

The B word, quite right. My understanding of some of the problems in recruiting from those of sub- continent heritage is that the Armed forces are not seen as as a 'Respectable' occupation such as doctor, teacher, solicitor, dentist or commercial pilot. The forces are seen as a job for those who find other employment difficult. Consequently, those offspring are discouraged from joining. So, until the PR gurus can start showing joining the services as a respectable choice, the low recruitment from certain sections of society will remain low. Using positive Action is not the answer.

[mopardave]

At the bottom of this post is a team that selects itself because it wants to have the very best chance of winning. There are no ‘quotas’, no ‘must reflect the make up of society’ and no ‘woke agendas’. The Armed Forces are the same, especially in a war-fighting role like Aircrew, where we pick a team with the best chance of winning regardless of what they look like. Can we imagine how badly we would do if we selected our 100m team on the basis of appearance rather than performance? Thankfully we don’t and the teams look like this because they are represented by the best that can be found in the UK…

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1600x1200/image_143111ee5f4f92b3cd998d37cc639df6b5cab1f6.jpeg
Well that's discrimination in action right there!! How come it's the lads carrying the lasses?

[cynicalint]

Well that's discrimination in action right there!! How come it's the lads carrying the lasses?
Perhaps because the Lasses were flagging more than the lads?

[mopardave]

So the fact is WE DO SELECT BY APPEARANCE - because too many BAME individuals who would be great in the RAF do not apply in the first place.

Oh we do, do we? So how on earth can you "select" people who don't make themselves available for ........errrrrr, selection! By all means encourage the best to apply, regardless of race or gender but what a ridiculous statement to make!

[mopardave]

Perhaps because the Lasses were flagging more than the lads?

Ba boom..........'ere all week! :ok:

[a_ross84]

Christ you lot are thin skinned.

[NutLoose]

Perhaps because the Lasses were flagging more than the lads?


and not all the right way up.

[langleybaston]

They do look the right way up to me, but most of the flags are wrong.. Possibly all.

[Cat Techie]

They do look the right way up to me, but most of the flags are wrong.. Possibly all.
Immaterial as one of the lads had been naughty with the steroids. All lost their silver medals.

[mopardave]

Immaterial as one of the lads had been naughty with the steroids. All lost their silver medals.
He'll be popular!

[mopardave]

Christ you lot are thin skinned.
Errrrrrr, tongue was pressed firmly in cheek there mate!

[Cat Techie]

D Reg always wanted to fly. Trevor E was a rock officer trainee that never thought about being a pilot until he was medically damaged by frost bite and it was try another path in the Mob. He had of course done IOT before his swap. Both above average as pilots and blokes.

[Union Jack]

Baldeep. Indeed. This is the racist sexist coddswallop those serving have to put up with. Did a whole day of listening to some idiot from High Wycombe the other day, implying that white males were the root of all evil, whilst letting loose that she had joined the airforce under fraudulent terms and was gaining a comission without undertaking any oficer training.
https://media-exp1.licdn.com/dms/image/C4E22AQH-iPOh_xD5NQ/feedshare-shrink_800/0/1651384688750?e=2147483647&v=beta&t=uvBsm8mALYQIoZQsXDpP3wam0ufp85hvzjBpVy0ly70
Not Sarah by any chance?

Jack

[cynicalint]

Christ you lot are thin skinned.
If the joke has to be explained to you, then the thickness of skin is irrelevant!

[The Banjo]

Putting one's image out there in the current environment is probably not a good idea. A potential enemy would have them taken out before they got through the base entry to fight a war.
Whoever gets the gig is welcome to it.

[alfred_the_great]

To note, the anthropometric tests used to fit an aircraft are fundamentally anti-female, until every aircraft with an ejection seat is designed to fit the 5th centile female to the 95th centile male.

if you’re a 50th centile woman you’re unlikely to pass them.

[mopardave]

If the joke has to be explained to you, then the thickness of skin is irrelevant!
Indeed cynicalint......indeed. Ah well.

[Red Line Entry]

So the fact is WE DO SELECT BY APPEARANCE - because too many BAME individuals who would be great in the RAF do not apply in the first place.

Oh we do, do we? So how on earth can you "select" people who don't make themselves available for ........errrrrr, selection! By all means encourage the best to apply, regardless of race or gender but what a ridiculous statement to make!

Sigh.....Dave, that was the whole point of what I wrote. Of course we can't select people who don't apply. Therefore, what we can do is encourage more people to apply and we do this, in part, by positive action steps such as highlighting those from such communities who have joined. And of course, this is a complicated area, the B Word makes some good points about ingrained beliefs in some of those communities. This makes it all the more important for us to make efforts to break down those stereotypes. None of this should be contentious, and neither should the implication be drawn that this is any way minimises the contribution of those of us who look more like those stereotypes. However, this is the internet - I just can't remember if I came for the 5 minute argument or the 10 minute one...

[SASless]

"Preferably not White Male".....is that poorly written in today's PC World?

Would a White Male (at Birth) but who now self Identifies as a Black Female an eligible for that selection?

I would suggest the selection criteria needs much fleshing out.....to effectively describe the subsets of RAF Pilots that meet the desired criteria as what was posted is far too vague and does not provide equity of outcomes for all who might be interested in the Opening(s).

After that....the criticisms would be far better focused.

[vascodegama]

RLE much though I disagree with a lot of what you say , you are , of course, right that this is not discrimination but positive action. What pissed me off with the whole thing was the low standard of comms.

I suspect that you are in for the full half hour argument !

[Wokkafans]

Apparently the RAF/MOD has now "apologised" for the Tweet. Apologies for the source... .

"A Ministry of Defence spokesman said: 'This language should not have been used and we apologise for any offence caused. We are determined to encourage more people, no matter their sex or race, into the RAF.'"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10781781/RAF-apologise-wanting-preferably-not-white-male-pilot-represent-Gun-event.html

[Nil_Drift]

"Gareth and I" .... it would seem that nobody has picked up on the fact that it should be "Gareth and me". Probably Sarah is one of those who never uses "me" and uses "myself" every time. Well qualified to be a high profile Comms 'expert' for the RAF.

[vascodegama]

ND

See post 2. The use of quick not quickly wasn’t much better.

[langleybaston]

"This language should not have been used" can be taken as

"the thrust of the message was OK, but badly expressed".

[Stratnumberone]

I suspect that this sorry s**t show will have ‘successfully’ discouraged people from all backgrounds from considering a career in the RAF. Well done all involved!

[DaveReidUK]

"Gareth and I" .... it would seem that nobody has picked up on the fact that it should be "Gareth and me".

Actually, post #2 made reference to that.

[Darkmouse]

Who cares? If someone (who's eligible) has the same burning desire as the rest of us to be RAF pilots from the moment they can first remember, there is nothing stopping them. The colour, sexuality etc of the individual makes no difference, in the same way that the person appearing at the topgun 2 premier (which I think will be rubbish btw) makes not a jot of difference to anything.

Yes, we could debate many things regarding society, and I'm keen to, as I love nothing more than good debate, but what does it matter? I shall open with, "not a jot.".

[Nil_Drift]

Actually, post #2 made reference to that.

I admit that I didn't re-read the whole thread to ensure that I didn't replicate somebody else's observation but it was about 64 comments earlier.

However, you restated what Vasco said just 3 comments above so, if we were scoring [which we're not], it would be 1-0, would it not?

[Widger]

Its irrelevant what race, sex, colour or creed the person is. Top Gun and the sequel Top Gun Maverick is about the US Navy Fighter Weapons school and the crabs should steer well clear of jumping on the maritime bandwagon.

[langleybaston]

It is a very small bandwagon so, yes, not enough room.

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

Anyone stop to consider that BAME is statistically under represented as pilots because:

a) They don't want to be pilots.
b) Family and cultural pressures steer them to more "respectable" occupations like doctors, solicitors, accountants or surgeons.

Junior may wish to become the newer model E-Reg, but that matters not if mummy and daddy want to say their child is an important banker in the City.

I am all for getting the right person for the job no matter what their creed or colour or limb count, but the bottom line is they have to want to do it, and they need family support before any positive-discrimination vid will have an impact.

As a parting shot, I think every "White Male Pilot" should reply to Sarah and Gareth with a simple "Why can I not apply?"

[Hydromet]

Anyone stop to consider that BAME is statistically under represented as pilots because:

a) They don't want to be pilots.
b) Family and cultural pressures steer them to more "respectable" occupations like doctors, solicitors, accountants or surgeons.

Junior may wish to become the newer model E-Reg, but that matters not if mummy and daddy want to say their child is an important banker in the City.

I am all for getting the right person for the job no matter what their creed or colour or limb count, but the bottom line is they have to want to do it, and they need family support before any positive-discrimination vid will have an impact.

As a parting shot, I think every "White Male Pilot" should reply to Sarah and Gareth with a simple "Why can I not apply?"
Excellent points, SWB. A couple of years ago I was sat for the duration of a ~10 hour flight next to an extremely pleasant, intelligent and urbane young man of Indian descent, who had just left school with excellent results in all subjects. He'd been in and enjoyed Air Cadets or ATC, whatever it was at the time - in fact it was one of his main topics of conversation - but was off to university to do an economics/business degree.
I don't know what guided his decision, but it may well have been parental pressure. Equally, I guess, it may have been his own decision based on other reasons, but he was certainly going to miss the aviation environment.

[mopardave]

Anyone stop to consider that BAME is statistically under represented as pilots because:

a) They don't want to be pilots.
b) Family and cultural pressures steer them to more "respectable" occupations like doctors, solicitors, accountants or surgeons.

Junior may wish to become the newer model E-Reg, but that matters not if mummy and daddy want to say their child is an important banker in the City.

I am all for getting the right person for the job no matter what their creed or colour or limb count, but the bottom line is they have to want to do it, and they need family support before any positive-discrimination vid will have an impact.

As a parting shot, I think every "White Male Pilot" should reply to Sarah and Gareth with a simple "Why can I not apply?"

Absolutely SWB...........Sarah and Gareth need to attend an equalities and diversity course pronto! Many years ago, my boss represented the blue light services at a college open day. A lovely guy and a fine ambassador for the service. Anyway, he decides it's about time we "target" females of Asian descent........he could still here the laughter as he was driving away. He couldn't believe the disdain and incredulity at his suggestion of a career in the emergency services. Granted, it would have been 20 years ago but maybe other sections of the community need to be more open minded? If you've got what it takes and you want to do it, you'll do it.........to suggest that discrimination is the reason is very convenient. You can lead a horse to water...................

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

...Whenever I say I was in the RAF, the immediate response is “Were you a Pilot?”.

Surely, everyone knows that you don't need to ask "were you a pilot?".

A "real" pilot will tell you in their opening sentence ;-)

[[email protected]]

A "real" pilot will tell you in their opening sentence ;-) With the right amount of swagger and testosterone, the words don't even have to leave your mouth - people just know you are part of the two-winged master race:)

[MPN11]

... and the big free watch.

[Roland Pulfrew]

Currently, 3.3% of the RAF is BAME (source at Linky (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-armed-forces-biannual-diversity-statistics-2021/uk-armed-forces-biannual-diversity-statistics-1-april-2021)), whereas across the UK population, 14% are BAME. So the fact is WE DO SELECT BY APPEARANCE
I'm afraid that is a gross over-simplification of the argument. Just because 14% of the UK population is BAME, does not mean that the selection is done on appearance. I do not know the statistics for BAME aptitude scores, but I do know that aptitude score distribution curves are very different between male and female. That suggests that either the aptitude tests are sexist, or there is a physiological difference between the sexes. We should be selecting the best people for the job, and if that only means taking the best at [insert characteristic here], and that excludes other parts of the population, then so be it.

[alfred_the_great]

I'm afraid that is a gross over-simplification of the argument. Just because 14% of the UK population is BAME, does not mean that the selection is done on appearance. I do not know the statistics for BAME aptitude scores, but I do know that aptitude score distribution curves are very different between male and female. That suggests that either the aptitude tests are sexist, or there is a physiological difference between the sexes. We should be selecting the best people for the job, and if that only means taking the best at [insert characteristic here], and that excludes other parts of the population, then so be it.

or the aptitude was designed for 18-21 year old males as the “norm”, a long time ago and haven’t been upgraded…

”best” is generally subjective, and absolutely subject to conservative bias, sunk cost fallacies, and cultural barriers to change.

put it this way, if F-35 were the only basis for selection, the test would be different to selection for GR7/FA2…

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

With the right amount of swagger and testosterone, the words don't even have to leave your mouth - people just know you are part of the two-winged master race:)
:D

But...back on topic...

Did you just assume that all of the two-winged master race have testosterone?

[[email protected]]

Did you just assume that all of the two-winged master race have testosterone? Yes, it's just the levels that vary from the cockpit to the box-office:E

[Roland Pulfrew]

or the aptitude was designed for 18-21 year old males as the “norm”, a long time ago and haven’t been upgraded…

”best” is generally subjective, and absolutely subject to conservative bias, sunk cost fallacies, and cultural barriers to change.

put it this way, if F-35 were the only basis for selection, the test would be different to selection for GR7/FA2…

Incorrect. The aptitude tests are regularly reviewed and updated. They are also aircraft agnostic, so your last statement is incorrect. These are your prejudices that are showing.

[t43562]

Please tell us how a battery of tests designed to measure hand-eye coordination, spatial orientation, mental reasoning, prioritisation of tasks etc can be designed 'purely for 18-21 year old males'?

Would you add a few cultural awareness questions into the mix, you know, to make it really relevant to aviation?

We are all ears....
Possibly they are the ones who have done a lot of practicing of those skills thanks to other biases before they arrived?

[fokker1000]

Maybe the comms should have started with People.
I can see both points of view here. In the big scheme of things here, who cares.

Good night.

FK10

[MPN11]

Aside from the inevitable Pilot bias, I wonder what the Test Battery would be for ATC? Talk to 6+ people at once whilst keeping track of all their responses, via RT and Landline, whilst keeping visual perception of where 4+ of them are located and the spacial risks they may be facing?

I loved my job!

[[email protected]]

MPN11 - I think the tests cover all bases and, depending on your score, you will be offered anything from pilot to PI. They are very different to what I and others went through 40 years ago.

[[email protected]]

I have flown SAROps with male, female and TG pilots and trained pilot students of white, Asian, African and Arab descent - it doesn't matter a toss what colour, creed, religion or sexual preference a pilot is, if they can do the job they have a right to be in the air.

[MarcK]

Anyone stop to consider that BAME is statistically under represented as pilots because:

a) They don't want to be pilots.
b) Family and cultural pressures steer them to more "respectable" occupations like doctors, solicitors, accountants or surgeons.
The argument that women "don't want to be pilots" (or doctors, or lawyers, or...) is just so wrong as to be discriminatory. The perception that they "don't want to be" is largely based on systematic exclusion in the past, so one can point and say "see, there aren't many woman pilots".

[langleybaston]

But it is not about "they" plural, it is about "he" or "she" as individuals.
Unless a particular individual has been mysteriously affected by personal systematic exclusion, you have no case.

[radar101]

Aside from the inevitable Pilot bias, I wonder what the Test Battery would be for ATC? Talk to 6+ people at once whilst keeping track of all their responses, via RT and Landline, whilst keeping visual perception of where 4+ of them are located and the spacial risks they may be facing?

In the early 90s there was a problem with the aptitude tests for Fighter controllers (specifically what are now called Weapons Controllers) OC SFC at Boulmer said that he just needed them in the bar for a night or 2 and he would be able to grade them.

It didn't quite work like that but there was a short visit and some time on a console (+ time in the bar) - it did improve the pass rate.

[Tandemrotor]

What a damned shame that Tom Cruise’ Maverick is so bliddy white and so bliddy male!

Tone deaf or what?

[Ewan Whosearmy]

The argument that women "don't want to be pilots" (or doctors, or lawyers, or...) is just so wrong as to be discriminatory. The perception that they "don't want to be" is largely based on systematic exclusion in the past, so one can point and say "see, there aren't many woman pilots".

Evidence? What has happened to the numbers of females applying for pilot positions in egalitarian societies?

[CAEBr]

On this topic, Dilbert is doing diversity this week........

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/900x280/2nd_9eb932cfb65504eacd7952acaafcc20c84af131a.gif


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/900x281/3rd_228bc341a66c8dcad2fb12d83ac53a4c0592e761.gif


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/900x280/4th_d802732ef04d2eb3d0915b57df0547a06baa5152.gif


https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/900x280/5th_001c6252fbdebad7449d1ad1d5cc41dc4980a184.gif

[Sky Sports]

BAME potential pilot: I really really want to be an RAF pilot and serve my country. I'm prepared to attack enemies of the state, even if that means dropping bombs on my ancestral home, BUT.....I don't think they'd welcome me, so I won't bother applying!

RAF HR Dept. (war fighting, not for the use of): Despite the fact we have in the region of 65 applications for every 1 pilot job, not enough are from the BAME community. This needs to change, so we'll send a non-white male to the Top Gun premiere!

BAME potential pilot: Wow! There was a non-white female pilot at the Top Gun premiere last night. That changes everything, the RAF must be an inclusive employer, I'll apply straight away.

RAF Recruiting Website: THIS ROLE IS CLOSED FOR APPLICATIONS!

Duty rumour on pilot forums: The RAF pilot role will be closed for applications for 2 years potentially.

BAME potential pilot: BUGGER!

RAF top brass: We might of played ourselves a little here!

[Widger]

Quote:
A "real" pilot will tell you in their opening sentence ;-)
With the right amount of swagger and testosterone, the words don't even have to leave your mouth - people just know you are part of the two-winged master race

Constantly deluding themselves, when they are just another weapon system to be used and directed by the true master race!

[[email protected]]

Constantly deluding themselves, when they are just another weapon system to be used and directed by the true master race! but the ladies/gents/insert non binary status as required, love a good looking weapon :E

[Blacksheep]

I once upset the pilots in the crew room by stating the obvious truth that the RAF was the only service that sent their officers off to fight and die for their country, while the ground staff went down the pub and drank all the beer.

Possibly not quite the case if Ivan had started chucking sunshine at us, of course.

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

I once upset the pilots in the crew room by stating the obvious truth that the RAF was the only service that sent their officers off to fight and die for their country, while the ground staff went down the pub and drank all the beer.

Possibly not quite the case if Ivan had started chucking sunshine at us, of course.
Yeh, nothing worse than warm beer :-)

[Toadstool]

As one of the very few serving members on here (35 years and counting), my opinion on this is the following.

1. I’m not outraged or disgusted as some of the posters. I will though, be having interesting discussions right up my CoC about how the message in this email directly contradicts the mandatory D&I training that we currently do.

2. The RAF is trying to be and recruit more diverse people. This is nothing to do with quotas, but is about ensuring that we get to choose the best people from as wide a sphere as possible.

3. Having been involved in phase 1 training, is is clear that, while we are becoming more diverse, there still exists a disparity in who we recruit from as opposed to who we would like to recruit from. Again, this is to ensure that we have a wider pool from which to choose the best.

4. There are no shortcuts or lessening of standards. If one is good enough to be selected as a FJ pilot, regardless of anything,and subsequently passes the rigorous training, then they are good enough.

5. Everyone should do their research before attending OASC. If they did, they would quickly find out the sex, colour and branch of every CAS. Is that enough to turn away prospective recruits because of a perceived lack of diversity? If it is, then we are choosing the best from a smaller pool.

6. I don’t care about colour, sex, sexuality or any other factor, I only care about whether that person can do the job they were selected to do. When I joined, sexism, racism and homophobia was rife. Thankfully the armed forces are currently in a much better place.

7. For those that say we are not getting our priorities straight, it’s not binary. We can be diverse and war fight. Look at those relatively younger people currently serving, with their chests full of campaign medals, and tell me we are too “woke”.

[Corporal Clott]

or the aptitude was designed for 18-21 year old males as the “norm”, a long time ago and haven’t been upgraded…

”best” is generally subjective, and absolutely subject to conservative bias, sunk cost fallacies, and cultural barriers to change.

put it this way, if F-35 were the only basis for selection, the test would be different to selection for GR7/FA2…

They are updated and adapted on a regular basis. The Lead Psychologist that oversees the aptitude test’s design is a woman (a biological one) and also would tick the so-called “BAME” box (a term that many despise and the RAF should stop using). The tests are designed to ensure that you have the ability to pass the earlier stages of flying training (and other phase 2 training for other Branches/Professions). They are designed with an expectation that those under 24 will achieve the highest results. Just because you have a high aptitude score does not mean you will be successful to conduct the hardest flying roles - it just means that you are likely to pass early flying training. They have looked at CBAT, MicroPAT and the earlier mechanical aptitude tests to see whether high aptitude scores correlated to those that get streamed to fast jets and go on to fly single-seaters - they don’t correlate at all. However, the more recent CBAT and MicroPAT do correlate to a very low failure rate.

Some uncomfortable truths in that little lot…

[ASRAAMTOO]

Out of curiosity can anyone explain why the RAF has different fitness standards for males and females. Surely now that all jobs are open to both, the required fitness standard should be specified for the particular role in which the person wiill be employed?

[Nil_Drift]

Good question but not one that can be answered!

If you started a new thread with your question it would easily outstrip the #108 of this thread with strong views at both ends of the spectrum.

[Baldeep Inminj]

Out of curiosity can anyone explain why the RAF has different fitness standards for males and females. Surely now that all jobs are open to both, the required fitness standard should be specified for the particular role in which the person wiill be employed?

I could not agree more. Pure discrimination and it destroys any argument the forces have to say they promote equality. 2 applicants for a role. Same age, same job, same pay, same TOR’s, 1 candidate is male and 1 is female. The man must be able to run faster than the woman.

Completely indefensible.

[alfred_the_great]

Out of curiosity can anyone explain why the RAF has different fitness standards for males and females. Surely now that all jobs are open to both, the required fitness standard should be specified for the particular role in which the person wiill be employed?

In the RN, it was because the PTIs can’t count.

the RNFT is being replaced with an age and gender (and sex) agnostic test. The problem is that no one really agrees with what being “fit” in the RN should mean.

[Cat Techie]

As one of the very few serving members on here (35 years and counting), my opinion on this is the following.

1. I’m not outraged or disgusted as some of the posters. I will though, be having interesting discussions right up my CoC about how the message in this email directly contradicts the mandatory D&I training that we currently do.

2. The RAF is trying to be and recruit more diverse people. This is nothing to do with quotas, but is about ensuring that we get to choose the best people from as wide a sphere as possible.

3. Having been involved in phase 1 training, is is clear that, while we are becoming more diverse, there still exists a disparity in who we recruit from as opposed to who we would like to recruit from. Again, this is to ensure that we have a wider pool from which to choose the best.

4. There are no shortcuts or lessening of standards. If one is good enough to be selected as a FJ pilot, regardless of anything,and subsequently passes the rigorous training, then they are good enough.

5. Everyone should do their research before attending OASC. If they did, they would quickly find out the sex, colour and branch of every CAS. Is that enough to turn away prospective recruits because of a perceived lack of diversity? If it is, then we are choosing the best from a smaller pool.

6. I don’t care about colour, sex, sexuality or any other factor, I only care about whether that person can do the job they were selected to do. When I joined, sexism, racism and homophobia was rife. Thankfully the armed forces are currently in a much better place.

7. For those that say we are not getting our priorities straight, it’s not binary. We can be diverse and war fight. Look at those relatively younger people currently serving, with their chests full of campaign medals, and tell me we are too “woke”.
​​​​​​Hammer drives nail all the way in. Agree with you.

[NutLoose]

I have to agree as well, all this crap is simply detracting from the core goals and values of the RAF, yes there are problems, yes there are faults, but the current war ongoing in Ukraine is showing in no uncertain terms how a modern western force, the RAF included, is so far ahead of the curve in respect of the perceived opposition in both capability and quality that we must be doing something right.

[finestkind]

The point of most posts are that "I don't care if they are............ as long as they can do the job". If so the testing, training, and basic requirement's (fitness test) should all be the same. We acknowledge the physical differences between genders, why do we, and I think we are, not acknowledge the psychological differences. One being multi tasking in which the female gender appears to be superior and in an aviation world were hack rack and zoom is taking a second place to systems operation this becomes a core aptitude. RAAF aptitude testing was male bias until a few years ago. Not surprising considering little if any changes in the preceding 40, 50, or even 80 years and not utilised to keep females out just developed as it was a male environment. Quota's have been used to the detriment of standard's. By allowing a lower standard applicant through based on whatever means either changing standards to allow a pass (moving the problem onto the squadron) or nullifying the reason to do so, allowing more role models, in that there are more failures. Don't know the answer.

[WillNorris81]

Because they haven’t been sued yet.

[RichardJones]

This is getting out of hand now. I also have been discriminated against, for having a white skin. Next it will be, you're out of favour if you're straight.

[RichardJones]

2. The RAF is trying to be and recruit more diverse people. This is nothing to do with quotas, but is about ensuring that we get to choose the best people from as wide a sphere as possible.

Thread drift, if I may.

The above is interesting.

What is the RAF requirement for selection as aircrew, for example, as far as academic qualifications are concerned? Quite high I would expect. So those who don't make the cut, are weeded out before any aptitude for flying, is considered. This doesn't fit with your comment above.

Dragged up in a poor family I left school at 15, knowing up to 12 x table. I went the self improver route, and was flying professionally at 20. UK ATPL 1978, at 26. I classed myself as an aviator, not a mathematician. I'm not implying I would have made it into the RAF on flying ability. However I would not even qualify to enroll at a ATO now.

[Toadstool]

2. The RAF is trying to be and recruit more diverse people. This is nothing to do with quotas, but is about ensuring that we get to choose the best people from as wide a sphere as possible.

Thread drift, if I may.

The above is interesting.

What is the RAF requirement for selection as aircrew, for example, as far as academic qualifications are concerned? Quite high I would expect. So those who don't make the cut, are weeded out before any aptitude for flying, is considered. This doesn't fit with your comment above.

Dragged up in a poor family I left school at 15, knowing up to 12 x table. I went the self improver route, and was flying professionally at 20. UK ATPL 1978, at 26. I classed myself as an aviator, not a mathematician. I'm not implying I would have made it into the RAF on flying ability. However I would not even qualify to enroll at a ATO now.

I mentioned diversity, not aptitude but, of course the RAF (Officers and Aircrew) expects a certain standard and aptitude to be met before additional selection with CBAT and OASC. This is before they even get to phase one trg.APPLICANTS MUST:

Be aged 17.5 – 23 years old (Must enter IOT before 24th birthday)
Have GCSEs at Grade C/4 or SNE at Grade 5 or SCE Standard Grades at Grade 2/SNE 5 in English and Maths and at least three other subjects. Have at least 2 A2 Levels/3 Highers at Grade C or above (excluding General Studies, Critical Thinking or Citizenship Studies) which must total a minimum of 64 UCAS points
Be a citizen of the United Kingdom or holder of dual UK/ other nationality
Commit to minimum 12 years service
Meet the health and fitness criteria
Pass a Fitness test - Details below
Candidates must be able to swim - see details below

[Toadstool]

This is getting out of hand now. I also have been discriminated against, for having a white skin. Next it will be, you're out of favour if you're straight.

Not in the RAF.

[Darkmouse]

[QUOTE=RichardJones;11226975]

Dragged up in a poor family I left school at 15, knowing up to 12 x table.

​​​​​​Wasted effort - I've never used more than the 3 X table!

[BEagle]

Regarding fitness, BBC2 at 20:00 tonight 8th May looks interesting:

This is the behind-the-scenes story of one of the most famous military units on earth. The Royal Marine Commandos are globally renowned and nationally revered, and yet widely misunderstood.

With unprecedented access to all ranks, the series uncovers the role of a Commando in the present day through a rarely seen glimpse behind closed doors and the lives of the ‘Corps Family’, men and women who make up this extraordinary organisation, from the highest echelons right through to fresh-faced recruits and the not so fresh, but experienced faces of committed Royal Marine veterans.

Danger and drama are part of the daily routine, with risk and rescues simply part of the job. This is the story of the world’s first responders; from international threats to UK interests, to environmental disasters, Britain’s elite sea-borne raiders, are the proud descendants of 350 years of military excellence.

The series follows both national and international operations. Commandos are a global emergency service - from the Arctic to Anglesey.

[RichardJones]

I mentioned diversity, not aptitude but, of course the RAF (Officers and Aircrew) expects a certain standard and aptitude to be met before additional selection with CBAT and OASC. This is before they even get to phase one trg.APPLICANTS MUST:

Be aged 17.5 – 23 years old (Must enter IOT before 24th birthday)
Have GCSEs at Grade C/4 or SNE at Grade 5 or SCE Standard Grades at Grade 2/SNE 5 in English and Maths and at least three other subjects. Have at least 2 A2 Levels/3 Highers at Grade C or above (excluding General Studies, Critical Thinking or Citizenship Studies) which must total a minimum of 64 UCAS points
Be a citizen of the United Kingdom or holder of dual UK/ other nationality
Commit to minimum 12 years service
Meet the health and fitness criteria
Pass a Fitness test - Details below
Candidates must be able to swim - see details below




Thankyou for that.

[Cat Techie]

2. The RAF is trying to be and recruit more diverse people. This is nothing to do with quotas, but is about ensuring that we get to choose the best people from as wide a sphere as possible.

Thread drift, if I may.

The above is interesting.

What is the RAF requirement for selection as aircrew, for example, as far as academic qualifications are concerned? Quite high I would expect. So those who don't make the cut, are weeded out before any aptitude for flying, is considered. This doesn't fit with your comment above.

Dragged up in a poor family I left school at 15, knowing up to 12 x table. I went the self improver route, and was flying professionally at 20. UK ATPL 1978, at 26. I classed myself as an aviator, not a mathematician. I'm not implying I would have made it into the RAF on flying ability. However I would not even qualify to enroll at a ATO now.
You can fly. Do you have the ability to use your aircraft as a fighting machine and fly it at the same time? I have been fortunate to see both sides of the fence. All the dynamic pilots I have seen in the military can do so. Their ability shines through in all they do. I have seen some ATPL drivers that scare me in a car with their inability to multi task. How they can be classed to be safe to fly! A sad fact.

[RichardJones]

Indeed. However, you can't teach ability.

[Cat Techie]

Indeed. However, you can't teach ability.
Military training tends to weed out those with less ablitity at the beginning.

[[email protected]]

This belief that people a 'born' aviators is bolleaux - training and exposure create aircrew so actually you can 'teach ability'.

My major role as a SAR QHI on an operational Sqn was to take pilots just out of the training pipeline and turn them into operational SAR Captains - that doesn't happen overnight, it takes time both to hone handling skills (and teach new ones) and teach decision-making, prioritisation and CRM.

The same happens in all front-line Sqns/OCUs - you take the raw material from the training system - guys and girls who can fly (some better than others) - and turn them into proper pilots.

Most will tell you that although flying training was hard, the real learning and raising of ability occurred after they got their wings.

[Barksdale Boy]

This belief that people a 'born' aviators is bolleaux - training and exposure create aircrew so actually you can 'teach ability'.

My major role as a SAR QHI on an operational Sqn was to take pilots just out of the training pipeline and turn them into operational SAR Captains - that doesn't happen overnight, it takes time both to hone handling skills (and teach new ones) and teach decision-making, prioritisation and CRM.

The same happens in all front-line Sqns/OCUs - you take the raw material from the training system - guys and girls who can fly (some better than others) - and turn them into proper pilots.

Most will tell you that although flying training was hard, the real learning and raising of ability occurred after they got their wings.
Wise words, indeed.

[beardy]

Indeed. However, you can't teach ability.
Of course you can. Before being taught they are unable (to read or to fly etc... ) after learning they are able. You can also teach a skill (flying, forgery etc...) Not everyone can reach the same level though, aptitude and dedication play large parts.

[RichardJones]

Are you suggesting you could teach a pig to fly? Not too much ability there, or is there?

"You can teach a Monkey to ride a bike, but you won't be able teach it to read much in the way of road signs".

End of.

[langleybaston]

Are you suggesting you could teach a pig to fly? Not too much ability there, or is there?

"You can teach a Monkey to ride a bike, but you won't be able teach it to read much in the way of road signs".

End of.

A totally spurious line of argument, not worth a moment longer than to condemn it.

[Fortissimo]

This belief that people a 'born' aviators is bolleaux - training and exposure create aircrew so actually you can 'teach ability'.

Sorry, Crab, I don't agree. From my own experience as a BFTS, FJ OCU and sqn QFI, you can't teach ability but you can certainly teach skills and performance. I flew with some people who were naturally gifted and others who were anything but - same training, same exposure, but very different results. Some lack the ability to achieve high levels of technical and operational competence and no amount of training/exposure will fix that, some will require much greater inputs to get there, and others will get there easily and go even further in performance terms.

I agree completely with you that the product of the training system is unfinished and that further training and exposure are required to extract whatever performance the individual has within them. Whatever the raw talent (ability or aptitude) someone has, it is meaningless without that training. Whatever the semantics of the argument, I think we can probably also agree that flying instruction is not an activity that should be entrusted to those who have failed to make sufficient progress towards higher levels of proficiency. At its most basic level, you need to put good (ie competent) people into training roles. Garbage in, garbage out!

[[email protected]]

Fortissimo - you don't allow for the late developers - I've seen plenty of pilots blossom later than some of their - initially - more able peers and go on to surpass them.

If that isn't an increase in ability born of practise and hard work, I don't know what is.

The difference is that the more able student often progresses faster and certainly that seems to be the benchmark for FJ selection - it is a useful metric but doesn't cover all bases.

I think we can probably also agree that flying instruction is not an activity that should be entrusted to those who have failed to make sufficient progress towards higher levels of proficiency. yes, I concur but some of the worst instructors are those who found the whole thing too easy and then struggle to deal with a less gifted student.

Anyway we seem to have gone off-topic a bit now...

[finestkind]

Fortissimo - you don't allow for the late developers - I've seen plenty of pilots blossom later than some of their - initially - more able peers and go on to surpass them.

If that isn't an increase in ability born of practise and hard work, I don't know what is.

The difference is that the more able student often progresses faster and certainly that seems to be the benchmark for FJ selection - it is a useful metric but doesn't cover all bases.

yes, I concur but some of the worst instructors are those who found the whole thing too easy and then struggle to deal with a less gifted student.

Anyway we seem to have gone off-topic a bit now...

Agree with a but. The slow progress' are often weeded out due to rate of learning. Nothing to say that they could not have made the grade with more time but that in itself is an indicator of potential. Of all the suspended students that I have seen there is probably a good 50% that could have passed given more time. In fact I would say I could get 90% of the students across the line if given the time but in a lot of those cases that just passes the problem onto the squadrons. Rate of learning in itself is a significant indicator.

Also agree on those naturally gifted not all making good instructors. They lack the experience and empathy to understand the struggling student. I remember one in particular who just could not understand what was apparently so obvious, to him, why his student could not get it.

[RichardJones]

Agree with a but. The slow progress' are often weeded out due to rate of learning. Nothing to say that they could not have made the grade with more time but that in itself is an indicator of potential. Of all the suspended students that I have seen there is probably a good 50% that could have passed given more time. In fact I would say I could get 90% of the students across the line if given the time but in a lot of those cases that just passes the problem onto the squadrons. Rate of learning in itself is a significant indicator.

Also agree on those naturally gifted not all making good instructors. They lack the experience and empathy to understand the struggling student. I remember one in particular who just could not understand what was apparently so obvious, to him, why his student could not get it.

Indeed.

A person may be an ace at their trade, but if they can't put it across/teach it on to the student, they aren't the people to mark as trainers IMHO. We are all aware there is a lot of psychology involved in this sought of teaching, instructing or training. One either has it or they don't.

[[email protected]]

Finestkind - you are right and it is probably the difference between FJ and RW streams - in the RW world we are happier to invest more time and effort in what is already a well-trained product - the FJ world seems to have always been happy to be a funnel with a big top and a very small bottom so that only the quickest assimilators of skills get through.

Personally I think this is a waste of manpower and our obsession with having the best of the best is not very efficient - lucky we don't have many cockpits to fill any more :)

This starts at OASC - or whatever it is called today - I was informed by one of their staff that just passing aptitude tests wasn't enough any more - they were only recruiting from those who score in excess of 30 points above the pass mark.

Trouble is, as I'm sure someone will point out, the training system has been fiddled with and slowed down too many times and is only just (certainly on the RW side) starting to function properly.

[Asturias56]

"Personally I think this is a waste of manpower and our obsession with having the best of the best is not very efficient - lucky we don't have many cockpits to fill any more"

This is of course the point - the Pre-1937 RAF was very much an elite organisation who only recruited a very small number of flying crew

When you're losing 4-5% of your bomber crews in every operation you take a different view on what is "acceptable"

If the RAF were suddenly given the money to buy and operate 200 F-35's you'd see a sudden drop in the pass marks all round

Standards are not absolutes - they exist to produce ENOUGH people

[RichardJones]

"Personally I think this is a waste of manpower and our obsession with having the best of the best is not very efficient - lucky we don't have many cockpits to fill any more https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/smile.gif"

You mean the "best of the best" that made the cut at the academic qualifications stage.

Discrimination?

[Toadstool]

"Personally I think this is a waste of manpower and our obsession with having the best of the best is not very efficient - lucky we don't have many cockpits to fill any more https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/smile.gif"

You mean the "best of the best" that made the cut at the academic qualifications stage.

Discrimination?

RJ

the academics qualification is the very first step. Then comes CBAT. Once the results from that come through and IF you are successful with OASC, then it’s MIOT. Only then, if successful, do you attend EFT after ground trg.

You might have 10 A levels but if you don’t pass the pilot aptitude part of the CBAT, then you won’t even be considered for that. Perhaps another role but only after passing OASC and then MIOT.

Conversely, you may only have the bare minimum academic requirement for pilot but ace the pilot CBAT. Even then, you may fail OASC or MIOT.

Discrimination is absolutely never a factor.

[finestkind]

"Personally I think this is a waste of manpower and our obsession with having the best of the best is not very efficient - lucky we don't have many cockpits to fill any more https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/smile.gif"

You mean the "best of the best" that made the cut at the academic qualifications stage.

Discrimination?

Call it discrimination if you wish or a filter. When you have more applying than possibly can be processed than a simple filter such as min education required is applied. Medical standards is another. Both these can be eased or increased reasonably simply. Both of these have been eased to what they once where in the ADF . From the applicants side you can improve your education and there are some medical medical requirements that have changed plus either correct or challenge.

[RichardJones]

Call it discrimination if you wish or a filter. When you have more applying than possibly can be processed than a simple filter such as min education required is applied. Medical standards is another. Both these can be eased or increased reasonably simply. Both of these have been eased to what they once where in the ADF . From the applicants side you can improve your education and there are some medical medical requirements that have changed plus either correct or challenge.

Thanks for taking the time to explain that. Makes sense.

[RichardJones]

RJ

the academics qualification is the very first step. Then comes CBAT. Once the results from that come through and IF you are successful with OASC, then it’s MIOT. Only then, if successful, do you attend EFT after ground trg.

You might have 10 A levels but if you don’t pass the pilot aptitude part of the CBAT, then you won’t even be considered for that. Perhaps another role but only after passing OASC and then MIOT.

Conversely, you may only have the bare minimum academic requirement for pilot but ace the pilot CBAT. Even then, you may fail OASC or MIOT.

Discrimination is absolutely never a factor.

Thankyou for the information. Well put.

I am also aware, the person who has paid attention during formal education and achieved the academic qualifications, deserve the privileges. Not sow grapes.

Unfortunately for me I was never able to settle down at school. I have known one or 2, go back to night school to get qualified. Good for them too.

Considering recent goings on in the Ukraine, FJ jockeys for e.g., aren't being utilised to the same extent as in previous heavy debates. The military can really be choosy.

[langleybaston]

In historical context, a very good filter for enlistment before the Great War was height. Very simple: if you needed more [voluntary] men, you lowered the height, and vice versa. The Foot Guards minimum height standard changed more often than I change my socks.

[Finningley Boy]

Are you suggesting you could teach a pig to fly? Not too much ability there, or is there?

"You can teach a Monkey to ride a bike, but you won't be able teach it to read much in the way of road signs".

End of.
Actually this theory is incorrect not because of the apptitude of the average pig you're likely to encounter, but rather because it is equipped with trotters and not human style hands. Therefore, I believe pigs to lack the require level of dexterity, and not forgetting their ability to reach instruments in the cockpit/flightdeck etc, this would pose another obstacle to pigs getting their pilots' brevet. Furthermore, there is the question of speech, a pig and other animals may be able to understand and receive complex instructions, but they would be a liability in the air simply because they are unable to form words, in any known human language. Except for Sausages, and only then when aided with a human finger.

FB:}

[RichardJones]

Actually this theory is incorrect not because of the apptitude of the average pig you're likely to encounter, but rather because it is equipped with trotters and not human style hands. Therefore, I believe pigs to lack the require level of dexterity, and not forgetting their ability to reach instruments in the cockpit/flightdeck etc, this would pose another obstacle to pigs getting their pilots' brevet. Furthermore, there is the question of speech, a pig and other animals may be able to understand and receive complex instructions, but they would be a liability in the air simply because they are unable to form words, in any known human language. Except for Sausages, and only then when aided with a human finger.

FB:}

Many thanks for taking the time and effort, to produce a load of such interesting, but useless information.

[Herod]

Except for Sausages, and only then when aided with a human finger.

Actually, the "sausages" episode, with a dog, was on Esther Rantzen's show "That's Life". I think April 1st '80 or thereabouts.

[Finningley Boy]

Actually, the "sausages" episode, with a dog, was on Esther Rantzen's show "That's Life". I think April 1st '80 or thereabouts.
I believe it was 1978/79, I was stationed at Boulmer at the time and a fellow scopie brought it to my attention, he was fascinated and did quite good impressions of the dog saying sausages. I'm sure it must have been pre April 1980 as I left Boulmer in Feb 1980. Apologies yet again for thread drift everyone!:O

FB

[Nigel Marsh]

It is a wind-up.

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

For those who are interested, and for those who haven't got a clue what is being discussed, here is the clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajsCY8SjJ1Y&ab_channel=MostPopularClips2012

[Finningley Boy]

Well done SWB,

It brings back a large chunk of nostalgia. I understand Prince is now a much in demand after Dinner guest speaker?!?!?!

FB:ok:

[Herod]

Wasn't there also one of a dog driving a car? Sorry mods, thread drift again, but it teaches the youngsters something!

[T28B]

We seem to have reached the end of useful input, closed.