Centralised Engineering At Lyneham
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: various bits of UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this and the program is still not being met! (not enough manpower to carry out the tasks!)...so when will it change? when Simpler give the report to OC Eng on the VSA...apparently this has been done...so stand by for change??!?
Last edited by phutbang; 19th Feb 2005 at 09:33.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 6 miles 14
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How are they going to change? You just said there's not enough manpower to carry out the tasks. This at a time when we are about to cull the engineering manpower still further. This isn't just happening at Lyneham its RAF wide.
Last edited by HOODED; 19th Feb 2005 at 22:08.
Maybe it's about time we changed the way we do business at home.
Why don't we work weekends and have the rest of the week off? Lower tasking - easier to achieve.
And at least the statistics would look better, non?
Why don't we work weekends and have the rest of the week off? Lower tasking - easier to achieve.
And at least the statistics would look better, non?
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well now I understand, the new system at lyneham is sposed to be sh1te so LH can come in and rescue it!
I do hope no-one at the upper echelons of Lyneham engineering gets a job offer from Lockheed if they get awarded this contract.
I do hope no-one at the upper echelons of Lyneham engineering gets a job offer from Lockheed if they get awarded this contract.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: wilts
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jobza
Nice idea but slightly flawed. Those responsible for tasking would allocate the most knackered frames, meaning we have to work extra hard during the week to generate them thus losing the week off. Besides, local flying at the weekend would never catch on!
Oh hang on a minute, I think it's all the rage at the mo. Still a day out of uniform is a day wasted.
Nice idea but slightly flawed. Those responsible for tasking would allocate the most knackered frames, meaning we have to work extra hard during the week to generate them thus losing the week off. Besides, local flying at the weekend would never catch on!
Oh hang on a minute, I think it's all the rage at the mo. Still a day out of uniform is a day wasted.
If it's any consolation to you all it's not just Lyneham.
I have heard that there are absolutley no plans for the Tonka Sqn Engineering elements to merge at El Adem with grass!
That'll be happening then
I have heard that there are absolutley no plans for the Tonka Sqn Engineering elements to merge at El Adem with grass!
That'll be happening then
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: green fields....
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has been a few weeks since my last confession and I can gladly confirm that the new system is indeed Garbage.
On our shift we do intergrate the Kand J guys with good results, and some are getting cross trained for servicings on different types.
Oberon 1. you were correct in suggesting that the SNCO's were not involved at all in the planning, and yes all of our questions were answered by lies. EG:-
Q. "surely all this merging is just an excuse for manpower cuts"
A. " No, the manpower across the whole of eng wing will not be affected"
Yeah, thanks for that!!!!!
Also for OB1, as a member of Eng wing I cannot recall filling in a cencus and replying that I wanted to adopt a new system to be introduced that totally wrecked any kind of morale or genuine good sprit that we all had. All I wanted is decent deployable tool kits, new 30 ton air operated jacks, and for the programme to reflect what the aircrew actually wanted the A/C to be roled to!!!
As far as the lean team go, in order to improve the working environment you might have to spend a bit, or a lot of, money and this quite clearly is not the case. 'You have to speculate to accumulate'!!!!
As for changes, any change that can be implemented quickly and is for the better is a lot better than the present situation, where we all feel like pikeys, living in a sort of limbo in a makeshift home.
If there is anyone out there who is watching and has any kind of power, any chance that you can use some of it?????
I am off to the sandy place for another 8 weeks inside 12 months and frankly cannot wait to get away from Lyneham, such is our despair at the present moment.
Any spelling mistakes are all my own doing as I have fingers like pigs t@ts.
TA SC
On our shift we do intergrate the Kand J guys with good results, and some are getting cross trained for servicings on different types.
Oberon 1. you were correct in suggesting that the SNCO's were not involved at all in the planning, and yes all of our questions were answered by lies. EG:-
Q. "surely all this merging is just an excuse for manpower cuts"
A. " No, the manpower across the whole of eng wing will not be affected"
Yeah, thanks for that!!!!!
Also for OB1, as a member of Eng wing I cannot recall filling in a cencus and replying that I wanted to adopt a new system to be introduced that totally wrecked any kind of morale or genuine good sprit that we all had. All I wanted is decent deployable tool kits, new 30 ton air operated jacks, and for the programme to reflect what the aircrew actually wanted the A/C to be roled to!!!
As far as the lean team go, in order to improve the working environment you might have to spend a bit, or a lot of, money and this quite clearly is not the case. 'You have to speculate to accumulate'!!!!
As for changes, any change that can be implemented quickly and is for the better is a lot better than the present situation, where we all feel like pikeys, living in a sort of limbo in a makeshift home.
If there is anyone out there who is watching and has any kind of power, any chance that you can use some of it?????
I am off to the sandy place for another 8 weeks inside 12 months and frankly cannot wait to get away from Lyneham, such is our despair at the present moment.
Any spelling mistakes are all my own doing as I have fingers like pigs t@ts.
TA SC
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not the end of the world but I can see it from here!
Age: 54
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Feel sorry for you guys caught in the middle. I was on A line during Gulf War 1 and remember the place as full of morale and characters. Am now caught up in the Lean way with Tonka and that is killing the bases and the IPT. Hope someone in an ivory tower is reading these posts and can do something before the RAF is destroyed.
I know we always do our best but I am just looking for the exit point now. Sympathy to you all at Lyneham.
I know we always do our best but I am just looking for the exit point now. Sympathy to you all at Lyneham.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 6 miles 14
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All a bit late now. It has been crumbling for years, lean is just one of many initatives. Self supervision, multi skilling, rapid improvement events etc etc. It has led to less worker bees doing more and more with no breaks. The engineers are initative fatigued and most of the good ones have either applied for redundancy or left allready. Sad thing is the good ones won't get redundancy as they will get a nice blue "You're too valuable" letter. Just like the last time the majority of these will then vote with their feet anyway. This will then leave the RAF with less than the not enough anyway figure we were supposed to be going to. Still their airships will still get their fast jet jollies as there will still be enough guys to get one jet ready at a weeks notice. 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Mostly gardening
Age: 64
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Centralised engineering
Centralised engineering is clearly not the flavour of the month with the PPRUNE community, but in my opinion it does have one distinct advantage. I have experienced the JEngO-constantly-being-roasted-by-the-Sqn-Boss-for-not-meeting-the-task scenario, and quickly realised the Boss had little or no interest in or understanding of the day to day engineering task, and the problems and difficulties inherent. To a nervous 22 year old Fg Off JEngO, the potentially irresistable temptation after a couple of months of this is to allow aircraft to fly as long as it still has 2 wings visibly attached, in the knowledge that they "probably" won't fall off.
With centralised engineering, the JEngO, in theory, is only subject to anger from his SEngO, who, again in theory, will understand what the JEngOs are faced with. This way, the JEngO only gets the heavy pressure when he is being lazy/incompetent, not when it's just being one of those days that all engineers will recognise.
Without going into much detail, a while ago there was a textbook example of a serious aircraft incident where groundcrew being under pressure was a significant factor, although this time not from the Sqn Boss. (blow-down bottle - anyone recognise it - read the report).
The trouble it seems at Lyneham is no-one at the top of Eng Wg can give a stuff about the task, and no-one outside Eng Wg can give a stuff about engineering (I'm told the Stn Cdr is pretty conspicuous by his absence within this fiasco). The only message getting through to STC/DLO is the official OC Eng Wg "It's working a treat" message, which going by some of what is shown on these pages may not be the case. Mind you, the programme has been pretty light of late, but it looks like you're meeting it guys.
I don't expect you to commit suicide by posting here, but I would be fascinated to hear what Lyneham's SEngOs, JEngOs, WOs and FSs have to say about all this.
The necessity for general tightening of belts within defence logistics certainly did not arise from OC Eng at Lyneham nor indeed any other Stn. Each Eng organisation throughout the RAF has been told what to expect and left to deal with it in the best way they see fit. In the run-up to recent defence cuts, it was interesting to note there were no loud voices trying to maintain the level of manpower RAF engineering requires to operate effectively and efficiently.
A number of people have been accused of implementing various schemes "only to get them promoted". I'm sure they would argue that they ARE trying to get promoted, but they are working toward promotion by doing what is right and implementing schemes that will contribute to effectiveness and so on.
More and more in recent times senior engineering Officers have found that no recognition is awarded for doing a fantastic job of running whatever Sqn/Wg/IPT you are in charge of. Recognition (often in the form of promotion) comes from saving a substantial amount of money (often with little regard to the wider effect), or implementing a really exciting re-organisation (the more radical the better) and shouting about it to the world.
Interestingly, I believe Lyneham's OC Eng Wg was in Las Vegas the day her scheme started, telling the USAF how well her scheme had been working. Also, did anyone spot the article "Lyneham Rolls Out Lean Machine" in RAF News in November? Apparently this scheme was working a treat well in advance of its 6 December start date.
It seems the Lyneham re-organisation was conducted by the few and ignored the many. Old fashioned leadership and management are becoming more scarce in the culture of engineering in today's RAF, and indeed MoD as a whole.
Has OC Eng Wg really never visited her troops out in Basra??!!?
With centralised engineering, the JEngO, in theory, is only subject to anger from his SEngO, who, again in theory, will understand what the JEngOs are faced with. This way, the JEngO only gets the heavy pressure when he is being lazy/incompetent, not when it's just being one of those days that all engineers will recognise.
Without going into much detail, a while ago there was a textbook example of a serious aircraft incident where groundcrew being under pressure was a significant factor, although this time not from the Sqn Boss. (blow-down bottle - anyone recognise it - read the report).
The trouble it seems at Lyneham is no-one at the top of Eng Wg can give a stuff about the task, and no-one outside Eng Wg can give a stuff about engineering (I'm told the Stn Cdr is pretty conspicuous by his absence within this fiasco). The only message getting through to STC/DLO is the official OC Eng Wg "It's working a treat" message, which going by some of what is shown on these pages may not be the case. Mind you, the programme has been pretty light of late, but it looks like you're meeting it guys.
I don't expect you to commit suicide by posting here, but I would be fascinated to hear what Lyneham's SEngOs, JEngOs, WOs and FSs have to say about all this.
The necessity for general tightening of belts within defence logistics certainly did not arise from OC Eng at Lyneham nor indeed any other Stn. Each Eng organisation throughout the RAF has been told what to expect and left to deal with it in the best way they see fit. In the run-up to recent defence cuts, it was interesting to note there were no loud voices trying to maintain the level of manpower RAF engineering requires to operate effectively and efficiently.
A number of people have been accused of implementing various schemes "only to get them promoted". I'm sure they would argue that they ARE trying to get promoted, but they are working toward promotion by doing what is right and implementing schemes that will contribute to effectiveness and so on.
More and more in recent times senior engineering Officers have found that no recognition is awarded for doing a fantastic job of running whatever Sqn/Wg/IPT you are in charge of. Recognition (often in the form of promotion) comes from saving a substantial amount of money (often with little regard to the wider effect), or implementing a really exciting re-organisation (the more radical the better) and shouting about it to the world.
Interestingly, I believe Lyneham's OC Eng Wg was in Las Vegas the day her scheme started, telling the USAF how well her scheme had been working. Also, did anyone spot the article "Lyneham Rolls Out Lean Machine" in RAF News in November? Apparently this scheme was working a treat well in advance of its 6 December start date.
It seems the Lyneham re-organisation was conducted by the few and ignored the many. Old fashioned leadership and management are becoming more scarce in the culture of engineering in today's RAF, and indeed MoD as a whole.
Has OC Eng Wg really never visited her troops out in Basra??!!?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DesertBat - I'd agree that centralised Engineering per se is far from a generically 'bad' thing. (I know one JEngO who threw away his career by falling foul of direct Fg Sqn pressure in a FJ Sqn setup, and I also know a few very poor Engineers who were able to hide poor management and lack of commitment to the task behind the remoteness lent by a centralised Eng entity. ) What I am hearing though is that the current implementation is flawed in both notion and implementation.
Ref your Q ref OC Eng Wg : To those who served around and about earlier in that officer's career this would be no surprise at all.
Ref your Q ref OC Eng Wg : To those who served around and about earlier in that officer's career this would be no surprise at all.
Desert Bat,
You make some valid and agreeable points there, but I'd like to take issue with the beginning of your post. You infer, probably not intentionally, that the main thing that matters for a JEngO is keeping the sqn boss happy- is that at the expense of sensible and correct engineering decisions? (We all know that this happens). I would have thought the priority is to see the task is carried out as efficiently as possible given the available resources without compromising standards or safety?
Aircrew as a breed AREN'T bothered about the difficulties we face, why should they be? Harsh but fair. All that matters to them is that they have enough aircraft to do their thing with; how much pain we've gone through to achieve that is not their problem, it's OURS. Harsh but fair. We don't care that they can't fly due to bad weather, do we?
I can imagine how a young JEngO would feel in the situation you describe, but that I'm afraid goes with the joy of being the officer. You get good bosses, you get bad ones - you either roll with it or roll over. The best EngO's just do what's right, and let the career take care of itself. I do wonder though, in your example, where was the SEngO? Why did they leave you to face the music alone?
(We might know each other, I can almost imagine the two people in question!)
There is nothing I have learned that convinces me that there is any other way forward (at least in the FJ/RW worlds which I have experienced) than with squadron groundcrew, but unfortunately the benefits as I see them are not quantifiable to some zealous beancounter with little or no squadron experience. What I DO know is the situation down there at Lyneham is not acceptable, and I fear for the safety of our aircrew should it arrive in the FJ world because that is NO way to do business.
"it was interesting to note there were no loud voices trying to maintain the level of manpower RAF engineering requires to operate effectively and efficiently."
Absolutely spot on, squire. You might add "safely" to that too.
You make some valid and agreeable points there, but I'd like to take issue with the beginning of your post. You infer, probably not intentionally, that the main thing that matters for a JEngO is keeping the sqn boss happy- is that at the expense of sensible and correct engineering decisions? (We all know that this happens). I would have thought the priority is to see the task is carried out as efficiently as possible given the available resources without compromising standards or safety?
Aircrew as a breed AREN'T bothered about the difficulties we face, why should they be? Harsh but fair. All that matters to them is that they have enough aircraft to do their thing with; how much pain we've gone through to achieve that is not their problem, it's OURS. Harsh but fair. We don't care that they can't fly due to bad weather, do we?
I can imagine how a young JEngO would feel in the situation you describe, but that I'm afraid goes with the joy of being the officer. You get good bosses, you get bad ones - you either roll with it or roll over. The best EngO's just do what's right, and let the career take care of itself. I do wonder though, in your example, where was the SEngO? Why did they leave you to face the music alone?
(We might know each other, I can almost imagine the two people in question!)
There is nothing I have learned that convinces me that there is any other way forward (at least in the FJ/RW worlds which I have experienced) than with squadron groundcrew, but unfortunately the benefits as I see them are not quantifiable to some zealous beancounter with little or no squadron experience. What I DO know is the situation down there at Lyneham is not acceptable, and I fear for the safety of our aircrew should it arrive in the FJ world because that is NO way to do business.
"it was interesting to note there were no loud voices trying to maintain the level of manpower RAF engineering requires to operate effectively and efficiently."
Absolutely spot on, squire. You might add "safely" to that too.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Mostly gardening
Age: 64
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jobza...
Believe it or not, I think we sing exactly the same tune. My comments were erring on the "devil's advocate" side, but I stand by them all the same.
You correctly remark that a FJ SEngO should protect his JEngOs to a reasonable extent. Equally, the SEngOs and OC Eng Wg at Lyneham should have their sights set firmly on providing aircraft to meet the flying programme (is this currently the case?). They should give the JEngO the motivation and guidance to do the job, and instill the sense of duty, urgency and importance that perhaps is lost at centralised units.
Unfortunately at Lyneham it appears the command chain from JEngO downwards is subject to the "long screwdriver" from OC Eng Wg, which may be compared to the hypothetical FJ JEngO not being protected from unreasonable pressure from the Sqn Boss. The role of the SEngO is pivotal in either case.
Even with the best intentions, a JEngO straight from the University-IOT-EOT sausage factory is not always going to be able to handle himself in the way that may be expected by those with more experience. Does OC Eng Wg at Lyneham take her JEngOs seriously? Where does she get her feel for what is happening on the "shop floor"? Are the Junior Officers in Lyneham Eng Wg employed as JEngOs, or are they seen as staffwork dogsbodies, or YTS trainees? These are the OC Engs of the future being developed!
My comments regarding the "long screwdriver" notwithstanding, the Stn Cdr is ultimately responsible for what his Wg Cdrs are up to (another benefit of centralised engineering?) , and will step in if the situation becomes too serious.
Lyneham has a long standing commitment to providing AT in the Gulf, a long way from senior Eng Wg management. Would anyone care to venture an opinion how the Eng detachment is managed in comparison to Lyneham Eng Wg as a whole?
We are running out of time before everyone simply stops caring.
You correctly remark that a FJ SEngO should protect his JEngOs to a reasonable extent. Equally, the SEngOs and OC Eng Wg at Lyneham should have their sights set firmly on providing aircraft to meet the flying programme (is this currently the case?). They should give the JEngO the motivation and guidance to do the job, and instill the sense of duty, urgency and importance that perhaps is lost at centralised units.
Unfortunately at Lyneham it appears the command chain from JEngO downwards is subject to the "long screwdriver" from OC Eng Wg, which may be compared to the hypothetical FJ JEngO not being protected from unreasonable pressure from the Sqn Boss. The role of the SEngO is pivotal in either case.
Even with the best intentions, a JEngO straight from the University-IOT-EOT sausage factory is not always going to be able to handle himself in the way that may be expected by those with more experience. Does OC Eng Wg at Lyneham take her JEngOs seriously? Where does she get her feel for what is happening on the "shop floor"? Are the Junior Officers in Lyneham Eng Wg employed as JEngOs, or are they seen as staffwork dogsbodies, or YTS trainees? These are the OC Engs of the future being developed!
My comments regarding the "long screwdriver" notwithstanding, the Stn Cdr is ultimately responsible for what his Wg Cdrs are up to (another benefit of centralised engineering?) , and will step in if the situation becomes too serious.
Lyneham has a long standing commitment to providing AT in the Gulf, a long way from senior Eng Wg management. Would anyone care to venture an opinion how the Eng detachment is managed in comparison to Lyneham Eng Wg as a whole?
We are running out of time before everyone simply stops caring.
Not wishing to divert this thread in anyway shape or form, but there is a historical aspect to all this, one I fear that the RAF may well be missing with its current focus on “Lean” “Rapid Improvement Events” and contractorisation.
The V-Force went centralised servicing in a very big way in around 1963, that was at a time when the V-force WAS the Air Force so there is no way it would have been some career enhancing push from someone at Group or Command level as I like to think that it was a rather different RAF then.
Now this was a change from traditional squadron groundcrew to huge centralised servicing organisations, yet, in about 1972 or thereabouts, it all reverted back to the old traditional Squadron allocation of aircraft and their own groundcrew, WHY?
Any of the old V-force types on here who post on a regular basis know?
My arrival on the frontline coincided with the Phantom, the only front line type I ever flew, when I arrived the squadrons in both 38 Group and RAFG were of what I would call the ‘traditional’ type with their own aircraft and groundcrew, yet at Coningsby there was still a whiff of controversy in the air as 38 Group, then a part of Transport Command don’t forget, where there IS a tradition of centralised servicing, had been planning to run the Coningsby wing on a centralised service basis with a pool of aircraft owned by Eng Wing, no squadron markings and no squadron groundcrew. I have to say this passed me by completely as I was rather focussed on getting to grips with flying the beast, but someone somewhere changed someones mind and pretty rapidly. This was at a time when one of the Coningsby squadrons was to have been on rotation to the Middle East yet I never heard (or cared at the time I have to admit) why this decision was reversed.
Anyone involved at the time still around?
Is the RAF in danger of really losing the lessons of history, again…………………
The V-Force went centralised servicing in a very big way in around 1963, that was at a time when the V-force WAS the Air Force so there is no way it would have been some career enhancing push from someone at Group or Command level as I like to think that it was a rather different RAF then.
Now this was a change from traditional squadron groundcrew to huge centralised servicing organisations, yet, in about 1972 or thereabouts, it all reverted back to the old traditional Squadron allocation of aircraft and their own groundcrew, WHY?
Any of the old V-force types on here who post on a regular basis know?
My arrival on the frontline coincided with the Phantom, the only front line type I ever flew, when I arrived the squadrons in both 38 Group and RAFG were of what I would call the ‘traditional’ type with their own aircraft and groundcrew, yet at Coningsby there was still a whiff of controversy in the air as 38 Group, then a part of Transport Command don’t forget, where there IS a tradition of centralised servicing, had been planning to run the Coningsby wing on a centralised service basis with a pool of aircraft owned by Eng Wing, no squadron markings and no squadron groundcrew. I have to say this passed me by completely as I was rather focussed on getting to grips with flying the beast, but someone somewhere changed someones mind and pretty rapidly. This was at a time when one of the Coningsby squadrons was to have been on rotation to the Middle East yet I never heard (or cared at the time I have to admit) why this decision was reversed.
Anyone involved at the time still around?
Is the RAF in danger of really losing the lessons of history, again…………………
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: wilts
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DB
I think the Lyneham Eng Det is managed very competently in comparison to Eng wing at home (going by the ones I have been involved with).
Jobza
We do care if the aeroplne drivers don't get to go driving due to bad weather. More to the point when we have just changed the role from full roller (with boards) to full para, even when the met forcast for the following day does not lend itself to the ejection of silk retarded meat bombs.
pr00ne
Absolutly. It may take three or more changes before somebody realises that it just ain't right, but then again...............
I think the Lyneham Eng Det is managed very competently in comparison to Eng wing at home (going by the ones I have been involved with).
Jobza
We do care if the aeroplne drivers don't get to go driving due to bad weather. More to the point when we have just changed the role from full roller (with boards) to full para, even when the met forcast for the following day does not lend itself to the ejection of silk retarded meat bombs.
pr00ne
Absolutly. It may take three or more changes before somebody realises that it just ain't right, but then again...............
Lineslime,
Point taken.
Point taken.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: wilts
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jobza
It isn't the drivers fault when these things happen, as we all know they pitch up waiting to go all keen and eager (just like the see off crew), it's the planners and those responsible for tasking.
It isn't the drivers fault when these things happen, as we all know they pitch up waiting to go all keen and eager (just like the see off crew), it's the planners and those responsible for tasking.