Ojar
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcestershire
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ojar
How much time have you wasted struggling with OJAR software.
It's as intuitive as a thing that is not very intuitive clumsy
How much did we pay for it?
Can we claim back all the money for all the hours lost to the services.
I am not a letter (B) I am a free man!
It's as intuitive as a thing that is not very intuitive clumsy
How much did we pay for it?
Can we claim back all the money for all the hours lost to the services.
I am not a letter (B) I am a free man!
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's rubbish. However, it is a lot better than the F6000 software, so we are moving forwards slowly. Very slowly. The nause created by ACRs is, in my opinion, wholly due to the software.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Closer to home now
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ojar
Couldn't agree more! I bloody hate the things. It was better when we had a chalkboard and pencil and I threw chicken bones at walls! None of my lot are getting promoted anyway as they are a bunch of billy smarts' rejects 
Better than the F6000 software? Maybe we're using different versions of the damned stuff. I've found the OJAR stuff to be about as user friendly as the proverbial chocolate teapot
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Road to Nowhere
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DISKNET?
Quite apart from the requirement to keep coming out of one role and back into another to correct errors or draft for the next RO, the thing that really P****s me off about the F6000 software is the incompatibility with the Disknet software that is used on most units.
If other procurement projects are anything to go by, I don't suppose this was mentioned in the original user requirement - but it shouldn't have been difficult to foresee. I don't know about the rest of you out there, but I have to do most of my reports at home on my own PC, so Disknet is a real pain in the A**E.
I understand the need for it, but it would be better if it worked!!
As for which is worse, I think the F6000 software has it, but there isn't much in it! That said, I have had to completely re-type 2 ACRs this year due to disks becoming corrupted following exposure to Disknet machines; when you're the 3RO, it is truly tear inducing!
Come on Scribblies, get it sorted and give us a chance!
If other procurement projects are anything to go by, I don't suppose this was mentioned in the original user requirement - but it shouldn't have been difficult to foresee. I don't know about the rest of you out there, but I have to do most of my reports at home on my own PC, so Disknet is a real pain in the A**E.
I understand the need for it, but it would be better if it worked!!
As for which is worse, I think the F6000 software has it, but there isn't much in it! That said, I have had to completely re-type 2 ACRs this year due to disks becoming corrupted following exposure to Disknet machines; when you're the 3RO, it is truly tear inducing!
Come on Scribblies, get it sorted and give us a chance!
Ahhh yes, Disknet, sorry, forgot about that. We just have NATS computers which have got 'sponsored by Richard Branson' stickered on the side! NATS can't afford disknet so we don't tend to have the problems that the rest of the service does! Bad luck
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Lindum
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PT - agree all round mate - OJAR is to appraisal what Rudolph Nureyev was to street fighting......... 
And how about the "everyone's a 'B' syndrome"? - Surely I should be able to grade the man who plays out of his skin for me higher than the numpty who needs to be reminded to wipe his a**e, without fear of contradiction from PSF/Stn Cdr/PMA, who apparently don't want to upset our brown or dark blue brothers. If you call it as you see it, the guy/girl you are reporting on should get a fair hearing at promotion board time.And another thing! - does anybody else out there think that the secondary duties/extra involvement thing has gone too far? When merit promotion was first introduced, secondary duty involvement was only cited as a way of separating individuals who had identical primary duty scores. Now, it appears that if you are above average and doing the secondary thingys, you will score higher at the prom board than someone who is exceptional (ie much better than just "above average") in the primary sphere but doesn't have the time/inclination or (cynical here) need, to be Treasurer/Coach/School Governer/Blah Blah Blah. If the NCA board exists to promote flyers first - why not acknowledge that the very very best flyers shouldn't need to jump through the extra involvement hoop in order to be promoted. IHMO, the last few years have probably seen promotion for some individuals who were good at "playing the game", rather than actually being the best flyers...... - any thoughts people?
And finally........... back to the OJAR - now that "empowerment" is the latest buzzword and the NCA prom Board will involve a single pool of all WSOp specializations - how do we feel about next year's OJAR round? Will it be better to have a FS/Macr first RO or not?
Remember - if it looks like a fish and smells like a fish.........
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 52
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Duane
Only me again 
Have you sat as an observer on the promotion board in the past couple of years?
Those that have been promoted have been assessed as exceptional in the air, with comments made by all three RO's as to why. Admittedly, there are a large number of 'promotion' candidates that are regarded in this light and only then are secondary duties looked at to resolve the promotional 'numbers' game. Competition is fierce.
I do agree that secondary duties now play too much of an important role in NCA promotions but, because there are so many strong candidates, they are essential if you want to get yourself on that list.
I whole heartedly disagree with you that certain individuals who you say have
For starters, have you flown with every single person that has been promoted in the last few years? Probably not, therefore, you won't know if those individuals are not the 'best flyers.'
Secondly, you can't get promoted by just 'playing the game.' Again, if you get a chance (if you haven't already) go watch a prom board sit.
I'm intrigued to know who you think didn't 'deserve' promotion over the last couple of years???
M7
Have you sat as an observer on the promotion board in the past couple of years?
Those that have been promoted have been assessed as exceptional in the air, with comments made by all three RO's as to why. Admittedly, there are a large number of 'promotion' candidates that are regarded in this light and only then are secondary duties looked at to resolve the promotional 'numbers' game. Competition is fierce.
I do agree that secondary duties now play too much of an important role in NCA promotions but, because there are so many strong candidates, they are essential if you want to get yourself on that list.
I whole heartedly disagree with you that certain individuals who you say have
probably seen promotion for some individuals who were good at "playing the game", rather than actually being the best flyers
Secondly, you can't get promoted by just 'playing the game.' Again, if you get a chance (if you haven't already) go watch a prom board sit.
I'm intrigued to know who you think didn't 'deserve' promotion over the last couple of years???
M7
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Lindum
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MCrew 7 – Ref observation of recent NCA prom Boards – yes, by virtue of a previous PMA appointment, I’ve actually observed or participated in 5 Boards in recent years and, consequently, feel I have a better than average knowledge of the actual promotion field (probably blown my identity now but no matter…….).
Maybe I should clarify what I mean by “exceptional”, as you and I appear to be applying different standards to that level. While I have no doubt that the vast majority of “A” grade promotion candidates are above average (ie. very good), the definition of “exceptional” (ie. very very good), really only ever applies to the top 1 – 2% of any group of individuals (it’s a Bell curve thing……….).
Promotion quotas over the past 10 years have, however, comfortably exceeded 1-2%, with the norm typically around 10-12% (these are –ish figures, but not far off). The bottom line then, is that not all promotees have been, or have had to be, exceptional in the true sense of the word. I’m not decrying the accomplishment of any recent promotees – they deserve to be competitive in promotion terms. What does concern me though (again IHMO), is that our exceptional flyers/operators do not seem to be perceived as being ahead of the “above average and with secondary duties” crowd and that, is plain wrong. If an aircrew promotion Board purports to be for professional aviators first and foremost, then our very very best flyers should gain promotion regardless of extra-curricular involvement.
I have no problem with the winnowing out of the 3-12 (ish)% of above average guys/girls by considering their wider contribution(s). I also have a degree of respect for those individuals who understand the “rules of the game” and play to win by accruing extensive secondary duty portfolios/CVs. In the end though, when I sign for my krugerrands and escape map etc and hand over my wedding ring, I’ll be looking to fill my team with excellent operators rather than accomplished committee members / school governors / OIC Printing Clubs. Call me a bluff old traditionalist but there you go…………
In personal (and personnel?) terms, I’m aware of at least 3 (in my view) exceptional operators who either waited unduly long for promotion or have yet to gain it. I’m not talking here of those mercurial characters who regularly score highly in purely professional terms but blow it with poor PQs – we all know people (and in most cases love ‘em) like that. Rather, I’m talking about individuals who comfortably, consistently and visibly out-perform their peers and seniors, - the sort of impact players that bring about step-improvements in the output of whatever crew they’re on. I may be wrong, but I’ll wager you the price of a Madras at the Prince of Darkness that you could probably name those same 3 people if it came to it. Regarding those who might not have really deserved promotion, I’m also confident that you would be able to identify those individuals who instantly divested themselves of their “important contribution to the local church” etc the moment that they gained promotion……. 'Nuff said?
It’s been a long spleen-vent this one guy – but I had to get it out so cheers for the opportunity. PMA had it right until recently but have allowed the secondary duty mantra to (insidiously) supplant the true ethos of aircrew promotion boards. I sincerely hope that empowerment of NCA will make a difference but am not holding my breath……..
Remember, if it looks like a fish and smells like a fish…………..
PS. Roland sizzers - don't worry too much about that AIS, the Promotion Board will not even be looking at it...... how barking is that for an aircrew board! OK MCrew7, I'm getting my coat.......
Maybe I should clarify what I mean by “exceptional”, as you and I appear to be applying different standards to that level. While I have no doubt that the vast majority of “A” grade promotion candidates are above average (ie. very good), the definition of “exceptional” (ie. very very good), really only ever applies to the top 1 – 2% of any group of individuals (it’s a Bell curve thing……….).
Promotion quotas over the past 10 years have, however, comfortably exceeded 1-2%, with the norm typically around 10-12% (these are –ish figures, but not far off). The bottom line then, is that not all promotees have been, or have had to be, exceptional in the true sense of the word. I’m not decrying the accomplishment of any recent promotees – they deserve to be competitive in promotion terms. What does concern me though (again IHMO), is that our exceptional flyers/operators do not seem to be perceived as being ahead of the “above average and with secondary duties” crowd and that, is plain wrong. If an aircrew promotion Board purports to be for professional aviators first and foremost, then our very very best flyers should gain promotion regardless of extra-curricular involvement.
I have no problem with the winnowing out of the 3-12 (ish)% of above average guys/girls by considering their wider contribution(s). I also have a degree of respect for those individuals who understand the “rules of the game” and play to win by accruing extensive secondary duty portfolios/CVs. In the end though, when I sign for my krugerrands and escape map etc and hand over my wedding ring, I’ll be looking to fill my team with excellent operators rather than accomplished committee members / school governors / OIC Printing Clubs. Call me a bluff old traditionalist but there you go…………
In personal (and personnel?) terms, I’m aware of at least 3 (in my view) exceptional operators who either waited unduly long for promotion or have yet to gain it. I’m not talking here of those mercurial characters who regularly score highly in purely professional terms but blow it with poor PQs – we all know people (and in most cases love ‘em) like that. Rather, I’m talking about individuals who comfortably, consistently and visibly out-perform their peers and seniors, - the sort of impact players that bring about step-improvements in the output of whatever crew they’re on. I may be wrong, but I’ll wager you the price of a Madras at the Prince of Darkness that you could probably name those same 3 people if it came to it. Regarding those who might not have really deserved promotion, I’m also confident that you would be able to identify those individuals who instantly divested themselves of their “important contribution to the local church” etc the moment that they gained promotion……. 'Nuff said?
It’s been a long spleen-vent this one guy – but I had to get it out so cheers for the opportunity. PMA had it right until recently but have allowed the secondary duty mantra to (insidiously) supplant the true ethos of aircrew promotion boards. I sincerely hope that empowerment of NCA will make a difference but am not holding my breath……..
Remember, if it looks like a fish and smells like a fish…………..
PS. Roland sizzers - don't worry too much about that AIS, the Promotion Board will not even be looking at it...... how barking is that for an aircrew board! OK MCrew7, I'm getting my coat.......
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Witney UK
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just apropos nothing at all really, although I understand and sympathise with DuaneDibleys sentiments, I only retired eight years ago after 38 years service but I have not got a clue what all the initials and titles mean. Am I being cynical if I suspect that someone is hiding less than advantageous changes behind lots of new jargon?.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Lindum
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Art Field: Understand your confusion about the acronyms being sprayed about here. To clear things up a little:
OJAR = Officers' Joint Appraisal Report - the Tri-Service replacement for what was the F1369/F4732 - in short, the annual confidential report. The RAF OJAR form is generated on computer and passed up the reporting chain on floppy disk.
NCA = Non Commissioned Aircrew.
AIS = Aircrew Insertion Slip - The OJAR form is designed for all Service officer specializations (and for NCA). The section for the main body of the report narrative merely describes performance in role and is therefore generic. To cater for flying specializations, the good old F5000 series has been utilized as an attachment to the main report and is also included on the floppy disk.
Here's the rub. Even though the AIS goes to Innsworth as part of the main report and is, therefore, available to the Nos 4 & 5 aircrew promotion boards (Junior Offrs/NCA), it is not used at all in determining an individual's suitability for promotion. Instead, Board members merely use the performance narrative section of the "main" OJAR report. This is fine for the non-flying branches but the fact remains that we maintain separate Prom Boards for aircrew. For an organization with a mission statement of "Excellence in Personnel Management", the PMA appears to be acting in an, at best, obtuse manner regarding aircrew promotion. For an aircrew Prom Board to deliberately discount available written evidence of an aviator's airborne skill is, IMHO, just barking mad.
There, - I've gone and said it now......... I don't actually think that the raft of acronyms floating about IS actually evidence of any unpleasantness being covered up, rather than being just more corporate Blah-speak........ but -
Remember - If it looks like a fish, and smells like a fish..........
OJAR = Officers' Joint Appraisal Report - the Tri-Service replacement for what was the F1369/F4732 - in short, the annual confidential report. The RAF OJAR form is generated on computer and passed up the reporting chain on floppy disk.
NCA = Non Commissioned Aircrew.
AIS = Aircrew Insertion Slip - The OJAR form is designed for all Service officer specializations (and for NCA). The section for the main body of the report narrative merely describes performance in role and is therefore generic. To cater for flying specializations, the good old F5000 series has been utilized as an attachment to the main report and is also included on the floppy disk.
Here's the rub. Even though the AIS goes to Innsworth as part of the main report and is, therefore, available to the Nos 4 & 5 aircrew promotion boards (Junior Offrs/NCA), it is not used at all in determining an individual's suitability for promotion. Instead, Board members merely use the performance narrative section of the "main" OJAR report. This is fine for the non-flying branches but the fact remains that we maintain separate Prom Boards for aircrew. For an organization with a mission statement of "Excellence in Personnel Management", the PMA appears to be acting in an, at best, obtuse manner regarding aircrew promotion. For an aircrew Prom Board to deliberately discount available written evidence of an aviator's airborne skill is, IMHO, just barking mad.
There, - I've gone and said it now......... I don't actually think that the raft of acronyms floating about IS actually evidence of any unpleasantness being covered up, rather than being just more corporate Blah-speak........ but -
Remember - If it looks like a fish, and smells like a fish..........
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcestershire
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was told again today that we are all B grades (satisfactory in all respects).
In a force which:
Strives for 'excellence'.
Quote: “An Air Force that strives to be first and person for person remains second to none”. (I am still not sure what this actually means).
Instils doctrine as follows:
Quote "RAF ethos is the distinctive character, spirit and attitude of the RAF which together inspire people to face danger, and even death. It is underpinned by tradition, esprit de corps and a sense of belonging. It encompasses the will to contribute to the delivery of effective air power that arises from confidence in the chain of command, trust in colleagues and equipment, respect for individuality, sustainment of high professional standards and the courage to subordinate personal needs for the greater good"
Insists we undergo regular, ineffective training, which is unsuited for our actual deployment sites. (CCS/ IRT/ IDT)
Provides poor equipment, remember, we end up flying in kit which is supplied by the contractor who can provide best value for money. This is invariably the cheapest bidder.
Yet we consistently deliver.
My point………..I think most of the people I work with are more than satisfactory in all respects. If they were not the job would not get done.
The terminology/ word pictures are wrong and we are trying to shoe horn most of our people into mediocrity.
In a force which:
Strives for 'excellence'.
Quote: “An Air Force that strives to be first and person for person remains second to none”. (I am still not sure what this actually means).
Instils doctrine as follows:
Quote "RAF ethos is the distinctive character, spirit and attitude of the RAF which together inspire people to face danger, and even death. It is underpinned by tradition, esprit de corps and a sense of belonging. It encompasses the will to contribute to the delivery of effective air power that arises from confidence in the chain of command, trust in colleagues and equipment, respect for individuality, sustainment of high professional standards and the courage to subordinate personal needs for the greater good"
Insists we undergo regular, ineffective training, which is unsuited for our actual deployment sites. (CCS/ IRT/ IDT)
Provides poor equipment, remember, we end up flying in kit which is supplied by the contractor who can provide best value for money. This is invariably the cheapest bidder.
Yet we consistently deliver.
My point………..I think most of the people I work with are more than satisfactory in all respects. If they were not the job would not get done.
The terminology/ word pictures are wrong and we are trying to shoe horn most of our people into mediocrity.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: East of Gibraltar
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phony Tony
I disagree with the following:
"Provides poor equipment, remember, we end up flying in kit which is supplied by the contractor who can provide best value for money. This is invariably the cheapest bidder"
We end up flying in kit that is either:
a. The cheapest, crappiest always breaking load of s***e because the supplier underbid everyone else with a totally unsustainable price which inevitably rises to match whatever everyone else bidded.
or
b. The most expensive, crappiest always breaking load of s***e because the kit is made in John Prescott's constituency and it keeps all his muckers in jobs.
Value for money is a luxury we know nothing about!!
I disagree with the following:
"Provides poor equipment, remember, we end up flying in kit which is supplied by the contractor who can provide best value for money. This is invariably the cheapest bidder"
We end up flying in kit that is either:
a. The cheapest, crappiest always breaking load of s***e because the supplier underbid everyone else with a totally unsustainable price which inevitably rises to match whatever everyone else bidded.
or
b. The most expensive, crappiest always breaking load of s***e because the kit is made in John Prescott's constituency and it keeps all his muckers in jobs.
Value for money is a luxury we know nothing about!!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tracy Island
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who wrote this load of tosh ???
"You, Curruthers; I want you to take this loaded gun and go and shoot yourself dead"
Bang
"Ah that's the spirit"
FEBA
RAF ethos is the distinctive character, spirit and attitude of the RAF which together inspire people to face danger, and even death
Bang
"Ah that's the spirit"
FEBA
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Lindum
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Recce
PT - agree mate (do we know each other?). The "B or bust" boll*cks makes a mockery of our whole appraisal system and undermines the effort and contribution of the great majority of the people that I report on. The PMA don't seem to be able to get their head around the notion that any group of individuals will comprise of a range of differing ability levels and performances. If an OJAR narrative justifies the award of higher than "B", and that grade is supported by subsequent reporters in the chain, why shouldn't scores above "B" be available? It's as if the PMA don't trust our judgement - what makes them any more knowledgable?.
MCrew7 - re your last, thanks for the gracious comment. Also, judging from your turn of phrase, I think we may have met. Would you, perchance, be the ex-Red Gooser who, in a state of mutual inebriation at ASI, successfully met my challenge to nominate more cr*p AEOs than I could nominate cr*p MAEOps? If so, hope you're enjoying the new job........
Remember - if it (Blah)........
MCrew7 - re your last, thanks for the gracious comment. Also, judging from your turn of phrase, I think we may have met. Would you, perchance, be the ex-Red Gooser who, in a state of mutual inebriation at ASI, successfully met my challenge to nominate more cr*p AEOs than I could nominate cr*p MAEOps?
If so, hope you're enjoying the new job........Remember - if it (Blah)........
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not the UK thankfully
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Had my OJAR returned to my third RO by a naval captain (he's in my chain of command). Never met the guy, talked to him once on the blower. He demanded that my assessment be reduced as I could not possibly be above average, and anyway, my report would have to be worse next year.....what up with that!! 3rd RO refused...
So, what does it mean to give more than 100%? Maybe the higher-ups are applying this simple mathematical formula....
If:
A B C D E F etc...is represented by
1 2 3 4 5 6 etc....
Then:
H-A-R-D-W-O-R-K
8+1+18+4+23+15+18+11=98%
And
K-N-O-W-L-E-D-G-E=96%
But
A-T-T-I-T-U-D-E=100%
And
B-U-L-L-S-H-!-T
2+21+12+12+19+8+9+20=103%
And look how far a$$kissing will take you
A-$-$-K-I-S-S-I-N-G
1+19+19+11+9+19+19+9+14+7=118%
So, one can conclude with mathematical certainty that: while hard work and knowledge will get you close, and attitude will get you there, bullsh1t and a$$kissing will put you over the top.
Beers.
So, what does it mean to give more than 100%? Maybe the higher-ups are applying this simple mathematical formula....
If:
A B C D E F etc...is represented by
1 2 3 4 5 6 etc....
Then:
H-A-R-D-W-O-R-K
8+1+18+4+23+15+18+11=98%
And
K-N-O-W-L-E-D-G-E=96%
But
A-T-T-I-T-U-D-E=100%
And
B-U-L-L-S-H-!-T
2+21+12+12+19+8+9+20=103%
And look how far a$$kissing will take you
A-$-$-K-I-S-S-I-N-G
1+19+19+11+9+19+19+9+14+7=118%
So, one can conclude with mathematical certainty that: while hard work and knowledge will get you close, and attitude will get you there, bullsh1t and a$$kissing will put you over the top.
Beers.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcestershire
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FEBA
The quotes were from the RAF web site.
http://www.raf.mod.uk/info/statements.html
I note the new AP 1 now reads ‘ The distinctive character, spirit and attitude of the RAF which together inspire our people to face challenge, and, on occasion danger’.
2 points here:
1. Why is the RAF web sight is not displaying current RAF doctrine.
2. Why was the phrase changed, was the spin too close to the mark.
Some other quotes: ‘We may well be asked to fight on behalf of the Nation as a force for good in the world’.
Some points here:
1. As per the sexing down above should n’t the phrase be ‘We may well be asked to have a damn good argument on behalf of the Nation as a force for good in the world’
2. Who exactly decides what ‘is good in the world’.
I think that would be an interesting thread. Or even commented in an OJAR, FS Bloggs is an excellent pilot and a force for good on the Mess Ents Committee (Must be a B+)
tu chan go
Yep you’re right.
DuaneDibley
If you have been to 52n 10w then probably we have met.
Its always been my favourite place.
The quotes were from the RAF web site.
http://www.raf.mod.uk/info/statements.html
I note the new AP 1 now reads ‘ The distinctive character, spirit and attitude of the RAF which together inspire our people to face challenge, and, on occasion danger’.
2 points here:
1. Why is the RAF web sight is not displaying current RAF doctrine.
2. Why was the phrase changed, was the spin too close to the mark.
Some other quotes: ‘We may well be asked to fight on behalf of the Nation as a force for good in the world’.
Some points here:
1. As per the sexing down above should n’t the phrase be ‘We may well be asked to have a damn good argument on behalf of the Nation as a force for good in the world’
2. Who exactly decides what ‘is good in the world’.
I think that would be an interesting thread. Or even commented in an OJAR, FS Bloggs is an excellent pilot and a force for good on the Mess Ents Committee (Must be a B+)
tu chan go
Yep you’re right.
DuaneDibley
If you have been to 52n 10w then probably we have met.
Its always been my favourite place.
