Jag pilots to be airborne FC's?
It's one of those stupid, vague expressions used by staff hats.
Basically, "Nugatory effort" means "BŁoody waste of time"!
Oh, deep blue water thinking of jointery with vison..
Basically, "Nugatory effort" means "BŁoody waste of time"!
Oh, deep blue water thinking of jointery with vison..
Inter Arma Enim Silentius Lex Legis
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I knew somebody would accuse MM of being elitist!!
As somebody who once worked in a CRC and then went to fly on the E3's, albeit as an "outsider" I have to agree with everything MM has said in his piece!!!
As somebody who once worked in a CRC and then went to fly on the E3's, albeit as an "outsider" I have to agree with everything MM has said in his piece!!!
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seeing as the WSO cse is the first of many, it can be assumed that they will not be many slots left for jnr WCs at the CRCs. Who is going to break the news to them, that the one truely operational tour for FCs is in fact no longer for FCs? I can see their hearts breaking as we speak! Or will the STF find time to re-train "sub-standard" WCs from the CRC in its historically antiquated training methods!!
MM was only accused of being elitist as he clearly has no understanding of the WC Syllabus, or any interest in WC Trg in the CRC. Maybe if what the CRC pushes out is so not right for the CRC he should visit the CRC and advise them as to what they could do to help STF.
The proof will be in the pudding when / if the WSOs they check out. It will be very interesting to see what happens a few months down the line when they have their first airprox! Forgot - only CRC WCs have airproxes!?
GB
MM was only accused of being elitist as he clearly has no understanding of the WC Syllabus, or any interest in WC Trg in the CRC. Maybe if what the CRC pushes out is so not right for the CRC he should visit the CRC and advise them as to what they could do to help STF.
The proof will be in the pudding when / if the WSOs they check out. It will be very interesting to see what happens a few months down the line when they have their first airprox! Forgot - only CRC WCs have airproxes!?
GB
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
STH & GB
As an FC with a lot of E-3D time who has also served in several CRCs, I feel confident of offering a ballanced argument from both sides of the fence.
The reason that I state the proposed WSO WC syllabus is overly conservative is that STF regularly graduate exchange officers from the RN, USAF, USN and foreign forces who have NO prior experience of the application of control services. Whilst these guys present their own peculiar trg challenges, many have subsequently proved to be excellent WCs who have merited upgrade to FA and TD. Additionally, all of the current E-3Ds WSOs who went WC felt that they gained little at the CRCs.
With regards to Maritime Marshall, when I last left the ASACS environment not all that long ago, it was part of the CR syllabus. The reason that I used that as an example was that STH listed it in this very thread as still being part of Phase 4 LCR trg!!!!!
Your suggestion that FJ aircrew have a 'crude and often misinformed view of control services' is somewhat of a generalisation. I would say that the majority have a sound understanding. However, the different perspective of employing such services from 'the other side of the tube' sometimes leads to misunderstandings.
As far as the WC input standard for STF goes, this is largely semantics. Few of the current WC students coming through STF have done much beyond 2v2 work. I would suggest that, as long as the WSOs are exposed to 2v2 work at Boulmer, their aircrew experience will enable them to cope with the more demanding work.
As far as getting back to the CRCs to tell them what is required by STF: I am an FC. I have served in several CRCs. I may not be able to quote the current CR syllabus line and verse. But I have seen both sides of the fence. Additionally, I was very careful to avoid suggesting that I was any better than a CRC guy. Nor have I ever referred to the CRCs as having an 'antiquated trg system'. So may I suggest GB that we avoid such petty snipes, do not twist or invent the words of others, and remain objective.
I truly feel for the FCs on the ground as they watch WSOs come through and 'take' much sought after slots on the E-3D. God knows, I know how much I wanted to get on the jet when I was a first tourist. However, the status of FC personnel on the E-3D has for many years been massively undermined by the politics of it's own branch hierarchy. As a result, FCs on the E-3D are increasingly being marginalised and disadvantaged in relation to their WSO colleagues. The FC branch is now feeling the consequences of such machiavalian actions. Although the current mix of FCs, WSOs and WSOps works extremely well, I suspect that FCs will have disappeared off the jet by 2010.
Casting such politics aside however, the WSO WC scheme will provide notable benefts for the E-3D force. Whilst there will probably be some failures, my E-3D and CRC experience leads me to believe that, overall, it will be a success.
Regards,
M2
PS I too was a DE who avoided the nugatory effort of a uni ed!!!
PPS Beags, never been a staff hat, nor do I wish to be one!!!
As an FC with a lot of E-3D time who has also served in several CRCs, I feel confident of offering a ballanced argument from both sides of the fence.
The reason that I state the proposed WSO WC syllabus is overly conservative is that STF regularly graduate exchange officers from the RN, USAF, USN and foreign forces who have NO prior experience of the application of control services. Whilst these guys present their own peculiar trg challenges, many have subsequently proved to be excellent WCs who have merited upgrade to FA and TD. Additionally, all of the current E-3Ds WSOs who went WC felt that they gained little at the CRCs.
With regards to Maritime Marshall, when I last left the ASACS environment not all that long ago, it was part of the CR syllabus. The reason that I used that as an example was that STH listed it in this very thread as still being part of Phase 4 LCR trg!!!!!
Your suggestion that FJ aircrew have a 'crude and often misinformed view of control services' is somewhat of a generalisation. I would say that the majority have a sound understanding. However, the different perspective of employing such services from 'the other side of the tube' sometimes leads to misunderstandings.
As far as the WC input standard for STF goes, this is largely semantics. Few of the current WC students coming through STF have done much beyond 2v2 work. I would suggest that, as long as the WSOs are exposed to 2v2 work at Boulmer, their aircrew experience will enable them to cope with the more demanding work.
As far as getting back to the CRCs to tell them what is required by STF: I am an FC. I have served in several CRCs. I may not be able to quote the current CR syllabus line and verse. But I have seen both sides of the fence. Additionally, I was very careful to avoid suggesting that I was any better than a CRC guy. Nor have I ever referred to the CRCs as having an 'antiquated trg system'. So may I suggest GB that we avoid such petty snipes, do not twist or invent the words of others, and remain objective.
I truly feel for the FCs on the ground as they watch WSOs come through and 'take' much sought after slots on the E-3D. God knows, I know how much I wanted to get on the jet when I was a first tourist. However, the status of FC personnel on the E-3D has for many years been massively undermined by the politics of it's own branch hierarchy. As a result, FCs on the E-3D are increasingly being marginalised and disadvantaged in relation to their WSO colleagues. The FC branch is now feeling the consequences of such machiavalian actions. Although the current mix of FCs, WSOs and WSOps works extremely well, I suspect that FCs will have disappeared off the jet by 2010.
Casting such politics aside however, the WSO WC scheme will provide notable benefts for the E-3D force. Whilst there will probably be some failures, my E-3D and CRC experience leads me to believe that, overall, it will be a success.
Regards,
M2
PS I too was a DE who avoided the nugatory effort of a uni ed!!!
PPS Beags, never been a staff hat, nor do I wish to be one!!!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You really do like the sound of your own voice MM don't you?! I understand that each and everyone of us has opinions,and the right to voice them, after all that is the basis of this site. But why do you feel the need to enforce your opinions as fact?
I understand that many years in the job you do mean that you feel qualified in what you say, but opinions are exactly that, opinions. None right, none wrong. I have read with interest each epistle you have submitted to this forum and really all I can glean from what you had to say, as an impartial by-stander, is that we are all equal, but you are more equal than others.
Why all the back bitting and b*tching? What inadequacies are you trying to prove are untrue? why do you continually feel you have to have the last word? I am not being derogatory, just curious. Is it really any wonder that the 'lowliest' people believe there is an elitist attitude from the E3-D crews when you post such patronising replies?
Though I must thank you, and the many others who join you in using PPrune to brush up on their English and not just to air their ideas and views! The forums more often than not read as a 'who can come up with the most syllables in one word' to make themselves look the most intelligent! Go on admit it guys, you all cheat at scrabble don't you?? You're the guys who offer to do the scoring so you can add a few sly points here and there, and who's hand lingers in the bag that bit longer as you try to feel the letters you want!! You are, aren't ya??
But nugatory?? Hmmm, that one is lost on me!! If it's a meaningless waste of time, shouldn't it be negatory? Look, now you've done it!! You've even got me making up words! Goddam it!
PP
I understand that many years in the job you do mean that you feel qualified in what you say, but opinions are exactly that, opinions. None right, none wrong. I have read with interest each epistle you have submitted to this forum and really all I can glean from what you had to say, as an impartial by-stander, is that we are all equal, but you are more equal than others.
Why all the back bitting and b*tching? What inadequacies are you trying to prove are untrue? why do you continually feel you have to have the last word? I am not being derogatory, just curious. Is it really any wonder that the 'lowliest' people believe there is an elitist attitude from the E3-D crews when you post such patronising replies?
Though I must thank you, and the many others who join you in using PPrune to brush up on their English and not just to air their ideas and views! The forums more often than not read as a 'who can come up with the most syllables in one word' to make themselves look the most intelligent! Go on admit it guys, you all cheat at scrabble don't you?? You're the guys who offer to do the scoring so you can add a few sly points here and there, and who's hand lingers in the bag that bit longer as you try to feel the letters you want!! You are, aren't ya??
But nugatory?? Hmmm, that one is lost on me!! If it's a meaningless waste of time, shouldn't it be negatory? Look, now you've done it!! You've even got me making up words! Goddam it!
PP
Last edited by pregnant penguin; 3rd Aug 2004 at 18:33.
nugatory
adj. futile; powerless; null; nugacious.
negatory
adv. no. (Originates from CB radio slang as in "Ah, you wanna give me a 10-9 on that, Pig Pen? Negatory, Pig Pen; you're still too close. Yeah, them hogs is startin' to close up my sinuses. Mercy sakes, you better back off another ten.." from Convoy by C W McCall.
adj. futile; powerless; null; nugacious.
negatory
adv. no. (Originates from CB radio slang as in "Ah, you wanna give me a 10-9 on that, Pig Pen? Negatory, Pig Pen; you're still too close. Yeah, them hogs is startin' to close up my sinuses. Mercy sakes, you better back off another ten.." from Convoy by C W McCall.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
It is a sad reflection on modern society that so many have such a poor vocabulary, and even more sad that so many seem pleased about it, rather than trying to remedy it. Nugatory is from the latin nugae, but they stopped teaching that a few years back as well.
We live in a time of philistines, perhaps we ought to ask Bill Cosby to open a chapter of his campaign on this side of the ditch.....
We live in a time of philistines, perhaps we ought to ask Bill Cosby to open a chapter of his campaign on this side of the ditch.....
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow.
Age: 79
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ORAC,
Don't wish to appear pedantic, but, as you brought the subject up
do you mean:
latin as in Latin ?
and
philistines as in Philistines ?
Only asking !!
Don't wish to appear pedantic, but, as you brought the subject up
do you mean:
latin as in Latin ?
and
philistines as in Philistines ?
Only asking !!
Mortuus quam mortissime?
I note that, many years ago, I was sitting an Entrance Scholarship for my school; this included 2 Latin papers.
Paper 1 (Composition) included such gems as:
2. (a) Give the nominative singular masculine of all the participles of the following verbs, and then translate the participles into English: facio, credo, patior.
Whilst Paper 2 (Translation) required the translation of a section from Pliny, then 4 lines from Ovid's Fasti - including a requirement to "...scan the first 2 lines, marking quantities, feet and main caesuras"!
That's what some of us had to do at the age of 13! But was it worth it...not sure. I do rather doubt it somehow. But I'm pretty certain that the slouching indolent digi-yoof of today would merely exclaim "Nah - 'snovair. 'S dooin me'ed in" if presented with such a paper.
Not much to do with JagFCs - sorry!
I note that, many years ago, I was sitting an Entrance Scholarship for my school; this included 2 Latin papers.
Paper 1 (Composition) included such gems as:
2. (a) Give the nominative singular masculine of all the participles of the following verbs, and then translate the participles into English: facio, credo, patior.
Whilst Paper 2 (Translation) required the translation of a section from Pliny, then 4 lines from Ovid's Fasti - including a requirement to "...scan the first 2 lines, marking quantities, feet and main caesuras"!
That's what some of us had to do at the age of 13! But was it worth it...not sure. I do rather doubt it somehow. But I'm pretty certain that the slouching indolent digi-yoof of today would merely exclaim "Nah - 'snovair. 'S dooin me'ed in" if presented with such a paper.
Not much to do with JagFCs - sorry!
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Economist style guide - philistine - lower case.
I am not perfect, never claimed to be, and I do make typos. I am embarassed by my faults, failings and ignorance, mea culpa. I attempt to correct them when they are pointed out and learn by them*. I would never be proud of them....
* And they were many and deep in my Spanish class today - but I did learn a bit. Me gusto estudiar.....
(ps. If they are that short of experience in the bunkers, I'd be happy to help out in my spare time. Got a couple of 16 v 32 ships in my log book (1991)...
)
I am not perfect, never claimed to be, and I do make typos. I am embarassed by my faults, failings and ignorance, mea culpa. I attempt to correct them when they are pointed out and learn by them*. I would never be proud of them....
* And they were many and deep in my Spanish class today - but I did learn a bit. Me gusto estudiar.....
(ps. If they are that short of experience in the bunkers, I'd be happy to help out in my spare time. Got a couple of 16 v 32 ships in my log book (1991)...
)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow.
Age: 79
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ORAC,
Re (P)philistine upper/lower case.....I stand corrected.
Philistine(n) = one of the warlike inhabitants of ancient Philistia who constantly harassed the Israelites.
philistine (adj) = uncultured, commonplace, materialistic.
Here endeth E5's lesson for today !!
Re (P)philistine upper/lower case.....I stand corrected.
Philistine(n) = one of the warlike inhabitants of ancient Philistia who constantly harassed the Israelites.
philistine (adj) = uncultured, commonplace, materialistic.
Here endeth E5's lesson for today !!
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm getting lost here...
when did Latin enter the WC syllabus?! I might have stood a chance on the ADFC a few years ago if it had been included....
amo, amas, amat, amamis......perhaps not.....
when did Latin enter the WC syllabus?! I might have stood a chance on the ADFC a few years ago if it had been included....
amo, amas, amat, amamis......perhaps not.....
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PP,
You are absolutely correct; my opinion is worth no more than anybody elses. I genuinely do not wish to appear patronising or cause offence to anyone. If I have, then I apologise.
I can well understand how my rantings can look like I'm trying to have the last word. The great weakness of sites such as PPRUNE is that debate often appears harsh as words cannot be softened by a beer and such things as body language.
I am certainly no elite. I just want the best for the Service and wish to put my arguments into the debate.
As GB and STH suggest...only time will tell who is correct!
Regards,
M2
You are absolutely correct; my opinion is worth no more than anybody elses. I genuinely do not wish to appear patronising or cause offence to anyone. If I have, then I apologise.
I can well understand how my rantings can look like I'm trying to have the last word. The great weakness of sites such as PPRUNE is that debate often appears harsh as words cannot be softened by a beer and such things as body language.
I am certainly no elite. I just want the best for the Service and wish to put my arguments into the debate.
As GB and STH suggest...only time will tell who is correct!
Regards,
M2
Prijon - 'amamus', not 'amamis'. Write out the full conjugation 10 times, then off to matron for syrup of figs, boy.
ORAC - 'vidi', not 'vedi'. 'Velcro' would probably be the first person singular present tense active mood of a 1st conjugation verb, hence would mean 'I stick'. Perhaps the first person singular of the perfect tense active mood (I stuck) would be more appropriate? I.e. 'velcravi'? See me after second prep!
"These things having been said, however, the movers of mud entered the machine of the mushroom in order to defeat the having been drawn up cohorts of the enemy by directing the fire steeds of the aerial knights ." Molesworth II
ORAC - 'vidi', not 'vedi'. 'Velcro' would probably be the first person singular present tense active mood of a 1st conjugation verb, hence would mean 'I stick'. Perhaps the first person singular of the perfect tense active mood (I stuck) would be more appropriate? I.e. 'velcravi'? See me after second prep!
"These things having been said, however, the movers of mud entered the machine of the mushroom in order to defeat the having been drawn up cohorts of the enemy by directing the fire steeds of the aerial knights ." Molesworth II
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Bris Vegas Australia
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WEDGETAIL CREWING
This thread has been a most interesting read. Having worked with NATO, French, USAF and RAF E-3s , I can certainly say that the E-3D team at Waddo have got the crewing mix right, from a customer's perspective anyway.
What scares me is that the FC community down here seem to have the same view that the RAF FCs were accused of having in some of the earlier replies in this thread....That is that they think Wedgetail will be their own private air force, they'll probably even try to fly the thing too!
As a muddie who will be sans chariot in 6-8 years, the WSO concept in use at Waddo seems like a good option to consider......but will the RAAF FC empire allow such cross-breeding?
What scares me is that the FC community down here seem to have the same view that the RAF FCs were accused of having in some of the earlier replies in this thread....That is that they think Wedgetail will be their own private air force, they'll probably even try to fly the thing too!
As a muddie who will be sans chariot in 6-8 years, the WSO concept in use at Waddo seems like a good option to consider......but will the RAAF FC empire allow such cross-breeding?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
You have to decide what you are buying.
If, like the RAF did originally, you are just buying a remote radar head for AD operations, it would make sense to man it, and run it, like a CRP or CRC. But a lot of water, however, as flowed under the bridge since then, and I very much doubt it.
The majority of people now see such platforms as more of an ABCCC with an integrated sensor capabilty. The manning should, therefore, represent the roles you wish it to perform in the future, not what the legacy system requires at present. The question for the future is where, and in what mixture to place your battle staff - in the aircraft or on the ground. I believe the USAF are moving in the direction of more bandwidth and decision making in the CAOC/AOC.
Which raises the interesting subject of who is writing the UKACCS specification and who the shareholders actually are. Still, not to worry, smart acquisition is proving so successful so far....
Perhaps more important than bums on seats in the aircraft will be coordinating the exchange of data across all platforms in all systems in all environments. Anyone any experience of the US JICO/JICC and which trades staff it?
If, like the RAF did originally, you are just buying a remote radar head for AD operations, it would make sense to man it, and run it, like a CRP or CRC. But a lot of water, however, as flowed under the bridge since then, and I very much doubt it.
The majority of people now see such platforms as more of an ABCCC with an integrated sensor capabilty. The manning should, therefore, represent the roles you wish it to perform in the future, not what the legacy system requires at present. The question for the future is where, and in what mixture to place your battle staff - in the aircraft or on the ground. I believe the USAF are moving in the direction of more bandwidth and decision making in the CAOC/AOC.
Which raises the interesting subject of who is writing the UKACCS specification and who the shareholders actually are. Still, not to worry, smart acquisition is proving so successful so far....
Perhaps more important than bums on seats in the aircraft will be coordinating the exchange of data across all platforms in all systems in all environments. Anyone any experience of the US JICO/JICC and which trades staff it?
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle
apologies - school boy error!
Mind you, the only decent thing about learning Latin was that it made watching the "Romans Go Home" graffiti scene in Life of Brian that much funnier. Now, do I need the nominative, accusative or dative....??
Anyway, back to the thread!
apologies - school boy error!
Mind you, the only decent thing about learning Latin was that it made watching the "Romans Go Home" graffiti scene in Life of Brian that much funnier. Now, do I need the nominative, accusative or dative....??
Anyway, back to the thread!