UAS 's to close (Merged)
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Farnborough, UK
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I spent 3 years on a UAS in the late 90's. I completed the UAS syllabus, and so the RAF EFT syllabus. I got about 100 hours I think in the end. I was never sponsored, and didn't join the RAF. Ok, so I was one of the rare people who managed to complete the flying without making a commitment to the RAF, but there were a few. In my year I think between 20 and 25 pilots began in the first year, of which maybe 5 actually went on into the RAF. On top of that there were the sponsored ground branch people too who got a bit of free flying as well as their bursary payment.
Of the people who went into the RAF, every single one of them wanted to take this path before joining the UAS at the beginning of their time at University.
The pilots in the squadron fell into two groups - those who sacrificed their degree for the flying, and those who sacrified the flying for their degree. There really was no balance to be found, because to do truely well at one, you couldn't put the required effort into the other. Probably half of the people from my year who joined as pilots (3 of 6, say) hadn't finished the EFT course during their 3 or 4 years with the UAS, because they chose the degree. They would have had to go back and finish this after IOT, and probably get re-taught all that they had forgotten from the flying they left off that year or more before.
I probably favoured the flying more than my degree, and so got a lot out of the UAS. If I were to go back I'd do the same again though as it was a great 3 years, a great bunch of people, and a load of brilliant free flying that I'll not get the chance to do again. I would have got a higher degree class if I'd have not been in the UAS, I'm pretty sure of that, but still, wouldn't take a different route.
Despite having gained a lot from my time on the UAS, on top of just the flying, I still don't think it is a cost effective training method, or recruiting tool. As I say, I think most people who go from UAS to be RAF pilots would do anyway. Many of them either have to go back and finish the EFT training anyway, or have a long wait before next flying at Linton.
I am an aviation industry professional now, and my UAS experiences have been extremely useful to my work, but have been of no direct benefit to the RAF for their investment in my training.
Of the people who went into the RAF, every single one of them wanted to take this path before joining the UAS at the beginning of their time at University.
The pilots in the squadron fell into two groups - those who sacrificed their degree for the flying, and those who sacrified the flying for their degree. There really was no balance to be found, because to do truely well at one, you couldn't put the required effort into the other. Probably half of the people from my year who joined as pilots (3 of 6, say) hadn't finished the EFT course during their 3 or 4 years with the UAS, because they chose the degree. They would have had to go back and finish this after IOT, and probably get re-taught all that they had forgotten from the flying they left off that year or more before.
I probably favoured the flying more than my degree, and so got a lot out of the UAS. If I were to go back I'd do the same again though as it was a great 3 years, a great bunch of people, and a load of brilliant free flying that I'll not get the chance to do again. I would have got a higher degree class if I'd have not been in the UAS, I'm pretty sure of that, but still, wouldn't take a different route.
Despite having gained a lot from my time on the UAS, on top of just the flying, I still don't think it is a cost effective training method, or recruiting tool. As I say, I think most people who go from UAS to be RAF pilots would do anyway. Many of them either have to go back and finish the EFT training anyway, or have a long wait before next flying at Linton.
I am an aviation industry professional now, and my UAS experiences have been extremely useful to my work, but have been of no direct benefit to the RAF for their investment in my training.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: london
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I chose a university that had a UAS so if (and I did) I got in, I could try flying. I couldn't afford to fly otherwise. I liked it, and spent 12 years then flying fast jets.
So, without the UAS, I would not have joined the RAF.
The UAS offers some that can't afford to fly a chance to see if they like it and I for one will be sad if it is shut down.
So, without the UAS, I would not have joined the RAF.
The UAS offers some that can't afford to fly a chance to see if they like it and I for one will be sad if it is shut down.
The RAF gave me a RAF Scholarship in 1968 and I learned to fly Cessnas at Bedfordshire Air Centre. I was planning to enter RAFC as a Flt Cdt; however, the day we all arrived we were told that as many of us as possible should now go to University. Thus a year later I went to London QMC to read Aeronautical Engineering. The UAS kept up my motivation by providing excellent flying training and camaraderie; chaps like 50+ Ray were also there at the time!
The difference was that the flying was purely motivational and was not formally assessed for streaming purposes; completion of the PFB syllabus merely reduced the length of the subsequent (and excellent) Jet Provost course at RAFC. Things continued like that for at least the next 25 years....as I found for myself when I did my first QFI tour at ULAS.
Pressuring the UAS students of today effectively to choose between flying and their academic studies is an atrocious way of doing business. UASs are an enormous intangible asset to the RAF and their cost is peanuts - especially as the RAF doesn't even own the aircraft any longer.
The UAS is an excellent place for novice QFIs to learn their trade; for that reason all FTRS, reservist, pseudo-civilian or whatever other non-regular personnel are currently instructing on UASs should go and their places handed to 'real' RAF QFIs. The syllabus should train the students to the same PFB standard it always did, but there should be no pressure, streaming or other factors to disrupt the students' academic studies.
The difference was that the flying was purely motivational and was not formally assessed for streaming purposes; completion of the PFB syllabus merely reduced the length of the subsequent (and excellent) Jet Provost course at RAFC. Things continued like that for at least the next 25 years....as I found for myself when I did my first QFI tour at ULAS.
Pressuring the UAS students of today effectively to choose between flying and their academic studies is an atrocious way of doing business. UASs are an enormous intangible asset to the RAF and their cost is peanuts - especially as the RAF doesn't even own the aircraft any longer.
The UAS is an excellent place for novice QFIs to learn their trade; for that reason all FTRS, reservist, pseudo-civilian or whatever other non-regular personnel are currently instructing on UASs should go and their places handed to 'real' RAF QFIs. The syllabus should train the students to the same PFB standard it always did, but there should be no pressure, streaming or other factors to disrupt the students' academic studies.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Close UAS's (and ipso facto, AEFs)?......................Bl00dy lunacy!
Never heard such tosh - and all to save just a few quid (that's about all they cost), getting someone faceless self-seeking oik promoted so Gordon Brown can have his pound of flesh?
I'm with BEagle - Lord Trenchard, in his final resting place, must be accelerating to destruction!
Those at the top - go with your feelings - you know this idea is wrong and will come back to haunt the Service.
Never heard such tosh - and all to save just a few quid (that's about all they cost), getting someone faceless self-seeking oik promoted so Gordon Brown can have his pound of flesh?
I'm with BEagle - Lord Trenchard, in his final resting place, must be accelerating to destruction!
Those at the top - go with your feelings - you know this idea is wrong and will come back to haunt the Service.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh get a grip, man. Move into the 21st century why don't you? The Cold War is over, thigs have moved on.
Accept it or go sit with your mate Trenchard and bemoan the loss of the Gosport tube in flying training.
Accept it or go sit with your mate Trenchard and bemoan the loss of the Gosport tube in flying training.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Cold War may be over but the Services need to recruit, train and retain top people. This is especially so in view of the lack of investment/infrastructure by HMG and our guys and girls being told to more and more with less and less.
Despite some bemoaners on this thread, the UASs have been excellent recruiting media for the RAF and a goodly percentage of today's Service have been attracted through UASs.
I'm sorry to pour water on the fire of those who think that to grab em early is feasible - it is not. Those young people who we need to recruit, all realise the importance of a decent degree, not just a HNC-equivalent in Mil Studies (not that this is ever going to happen).
Add to this, the backdrop of cil aviation's need for constant feeding - not just pilots but engineers, ops and ATC. It is predictable that Mil Aviation will find itself unable to recruit sufficient numbers of the right quality to become self-sustaining. The UASs might be able to keep us afloat.
Get rid of the UASs, then we are sunk.
FYI I am an ex-UAS stude and I am priviledged to have been taught by some excellent people. Their attitude and outlook on life persuaded me (and a number of others) to join up. Eventually, as UAS QFI, I was even more priviledged to pass on that enthusiasm to a host of people far more talented than myself.
Looking back through my log-book of 3 years spent at a UAS in the late 90s, I can count over 25 FJ, 10 ME and 10 RW pilots, some Fleet Air types, as well as loads of top-rate Navs and Gnd Branch stars . Some of our students are sword-winners at Cranditz and recent display pilots, medal winners in Veritas and/or Telic while others are already on the promotion ladder or even back as a QFI themselves.
While some would still have applied for the RAF, it is doubtful whether all of these people would have joined if they hadn't been through the UASs.
It would take a REALLY impressive TV ad/CIO office to beat that!
Despite some bemoaners on this thread, the UASs have been excellent recruiting media for the RAF and a goodly percentage of today's Service have been attracted through UASs.
I'm sorry to pour water on the fire of those who think that to grab em early is feasible - it is not. Those young people who we need to recruit, all realise the importance of a decent degree, not just a HNC-equivalent in Mil Studies (not that this is ever going to happen).
Add to this, the backdrop of cil aviation's need for constant feeding - not just pilots but engineers, ops and ATC. It is predictable that Mil Aviation will find itself unable to recruit sufficient numbers of the right quality to become self-sustaining. The UASs might be able to keep us afloat.
Get rid of the UASs, then we are sunk.
FYI I am an ex-UAS stude and I am priviledged to have been taught by some excellent people. Their attitude and outlook on life persuaded me (and a number of others) to join up. Eventually, as UAS QFI, I was even more priviledged to pass on that enthusiasm to a host of people far more talented than myself.
Looking back through my log-book of 3 years spent at a UAS in the late 90s, I can count over 25 FJ, 10 ME and 10 RW pilots, some Fleet Air types, as well as loads of top-rate Navs and Gnd Branch stars . Some of our students are sword-winners at Cranditz and recent display pilots, medal winners in Veritas and/or Telic while others are already on the promotion ladder or even back as a QFI themselves.
While some would still have applied for the RAF, it is doubtful whether all of these people would have joined if they hadn't been through the UASs.
It would take a REALLY impressive TV ad/CIO office to beat that!
The degree versus flying debate can be summed up as "a II/II degree is an aircrew first"! If you are on a front line squadron, who do you want to go to war with, an average pilot with the brain the size of a planet, or a highly motivated pilot whose drive and enthusiasm has improved his flying ability to a very high level (and who has, coincidentally, achieved the minimum degree required by the RAF)? I suppose the main problem now is that the RAF is most certainly not a job for life and your degree may well be needed for your second career.
And yes, I got a II/II but have based my second career on my RAF flying experience.
And yes, I got a II/II but have based my second career on my RAF flying experience.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...Looking back through my log-book of 3 years spent at a UAS in the late 90s, I can count over 25 FJ, 10 ME and 10 RW pilots,
That's efficient...we used to get that in 9 months worth of course throughput at a certain EFT organisation
That's efficient...we used to get that in 9 months worth of course throughput at a certain EFT organisation
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
On a pure value for money basis the ATC/CCF beats UAS hands down on the spend/recruit analysis.
From www.aircadets.org:
"41% of Officer and 51% of all Aircrew (including pilots, navigators, air electronics operators, air engineers and air loadmasters) recruits into the Royal Air Force are ex-air cadets .... The greater success rates and contribution towards recruitment, along with the personnel support role (eg at airshows etc) save the Royal Air Force an estimated £11.1m per year."
In addition the ATC (35,000 strength, UAS how many) also gives teenagers (and their parents) a very positive view of the Services.
I know that there are plenty of other good benefits from running the UAS organisation, but be carefull how you justify it!
From www.aircadets.org:
"41% of Officer and 51% of all Aircrew (including pilots, navigators, air electronics operators, air engineers and air loadmasters) recruits into the Royal Air Force are ex-air cadets .... The greater success rates and contribution towards recruitment, along with the personnel support role (eg at airshows etc) save the Royal Air Force an estimated £11.1m per year."
In addition the ATC (35,000 strength, UAS how many) also gives teenagers (and their parents) a very positive view of the Services.
I know that there are plenty of other good benefits from running the UAS organisation, but be carefull how you justify it!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: near the squirrel sanctuary
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that I am complaining (in fact the opposite), but the Defence Youth Organisation (ATC/ACF/SSC and CCF) costs the British taxpayer £100m per year. That came from the mouth of their big boss; Maj Gen The Duke of Westminster.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: somewhere in Wiltshire..once
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Grrrr,
Eventually I knew something would rattle my cage enough to get me to post, but I never thought it would be this.
Flip thanks for the training... who would've thought that I would now be a QFI..Scary!
Getting rid of the UAS's is complete arse if you are than going to say "ah, but its great for air cadets." You still have to operate the aircraft so the cost per cadet goes up. Give them 20 mins then send them to uni for 3 years they are bound to find something better to do. Added to that the best pilots I have operated with so far have definately not been ex air cadets who arrive with the " I've flown X hours tutor with a former Lightning/phantom/tiger moth pilot so this is how it should be done" HOOP. The RAF has moved on and these guys have no idea. If you can justify the end of the UAS than the AEFs should close tomorrow.
RANT OFF
Eventually I knew something would rattle my cage enough to get me to post, but I never thought it would be this.
Flip thanks for the training... who would've thought that I would now be a QFI..Scary!
Getting rid of the UAS's is complete arse if you are than going to say "ah, but its great for air cadets." You still have to operate the aircraft so the cost per cadet goes up. Give them 20 mins then send them to uni for 3 years they are bound to find something better to do. Added to that the best pilots I have operated with so far have definately not been ex air cadets who arrive with the " I've flown X hours tutor with a former Lightning/phantom/tiger moth pilot so this is how it should be done" HOOP. The RAF has moved on and these guys have no idea. If you can justify the end of the UAS than the AEFs should close tomorrow.
RANT OFF
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont think you can really compare the UAS to Air cadets in terms of expense and return. There is a huge difference in the investment made per cadet and the end result is wildly different. With an Air Cadet who does several years, you will get a teenager with military bearing, an interest to join, good exposure to service life and discipline. With a UAS cadet you get an EFT qualified pilot who is 'streamable' to go into full time RW/FJ/ME training.
Both are excellent PR for the RAF and allow people to get involved from an early age, as such they are obvious targets for cuts, and having benefitted from the UAS system I think it stinks that they are getting rid of it, but playing devil's advocate I can see why in the current climate there does not appear to be much choice. It makes no sense to have a two pronged EFT system whereby some guys do it in 6 months, and some 3 years. It is inherently unfair in terms of continuity and the fact that UAS studes have no formal groundschool before they start flying. Instead they learn how to do all the stuff they should have been able to do after graduating IOT before Basic training at JEFTS groundchool.
I can see the AEF's staying, which will end up flying UAS 'pilots' on a limited basis for air experience with an EFT system existing somewhere on a big UAS/EFT 'superbase' for guys who have done IOT. The UAS will just turn into an official drinking club as opposed to an unofficial one.
Thoughts, comments?
DS
Both are excellent PR for the RAF and allow people to get involved from an early age, as such they are obvious targets for cuts, and having benefitted from the UAS system I think it stinks that they are getting rid of it, but playing devil's advocate I can see why in the current climate there does not appear to be much choice. It makes no sense to have a two pronged EFT system whereby some guys do it in 6 months, and some 3 years. It is inherently unfair in terms of continuity and the fact that UAS studes have no formal groundschool before they start flying. Instead they learn how to do all the stuff they should have been able to do after graduating IOT before Basic training at JEFTS groundchool.
I can see the AEF's staying, which will end up flying UAS 'pilots' on a limited basis for air experience with an EFT system existing somewhere on a big UAS/EFT 'superbase' for guys who have done IOT. The UAS will just turn into an official drinking club as opposed to an unofficial one.
Thoughts, comments?
DS
"...Looking back through my log-book of 3 years spent at a UAS in the late 90s, I can count over 25 FJ, 10 ME and 10 RW pilots,
That's efficient...we used to get that in 9 months worth of course throughput at a certain EFT organisation"
That was just one UAS QFI's logbook. Multiply his numbers by all the other UAS QFIs and you get some idea of how good the UAS system is at recruiting high quality pilots.
The current 'streaming' philosophy is inherently unfair. Go back to the policies of the UAS about 10 years ago, get rid of all non-regular RAF QFIs and restore the proper, non-bean countered, role of the UAS.
That's efficient...we used to get that in 9 months worth of course throughput at a certain EFT organisation"
That was just one UAS QFI's logbook. Multiply his numbers by all the other UAS QFIs and you get some idea of how good the UAS system is at recruiting high quality pilots.
The current 'streaming' philosophy is inherently unfair. Go back to the policies of the UAS about 10 years ago, get rid of all non-regular RAF QFIs and restore the proper, non-bean countered, role of the UAS.
BEagle,
Just one thing that I would add to your post, in addition to the streaming point change and full time regular QFIs, put EVERYONE through whatever the MFTS equivalent of BFTS is going to be. At least that way the new guys/gals will be pitching up at OCU level with a degree of airmanship and sufficient hours under their belt to give them a fighting chance of being productive.
Just one thing that I would add to your post, in addition to the streaming point change and full time regular QFIs, put EVERYONE through whatever the MFTS equivalent of BFTS is going to be. At least that way the new guys/gals will be pitching up at OCU level with a degree of airmanship and sufficient hours under their belt to give them a fighting chance of being productive.
Beags me old dhobey bucket....you've 2 hopes of that happening in today's climate....and both of them are dead..pity....I liked Bob's films, and his troop shows!!!!!!!!!!!
HM
HM
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Far Side of The Moon
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It doesn't matter how good your arguments are to keep the UAS system, I hear that the senior officer carrying out the study hates the UAS system.
Why ?
Apparently because his son failed to get in on 3 separate occasions.
Don't suppose he would have declared a personal interest when he received the job.
UAS RIP.
Why ?
Apparently because his son failed to get in on 3 separate occasions.
Don't suppose he would have declared a personal interest when he received the job.
UAS RIP.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Up there somewhere
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everyone would benefit more if Air Cadet's actually did some proper flying training rather than aeros on an AEF. Tutor for UAS only, ATC AEF on the vigilant and Gliding scholarship on the viking. Far more cost effective.
As a UAS stude, i most certainly need to finish my training...
As a UAS stude, i most certainly need to finish my training...
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: In the Ether
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AEF? Good for what?
Kippers, me old,
Whilst there may be a TGO stating the 'syllabus', that implies some thing is being taught. In aviation ( at this level, at least), that requires a QFI.
Whilst not wanting to undervalue of the vast experience amongst most AEF pilots, they're simply not even close to providing interesting, rewarding fg trg when compared to that that UASs give. Has anyone seen an Air Cadet even half as happy/fulfilled as a UAS stude after his solo formation trip?
I still think that this will cost more in the long run. At the end of the day, the UAS is a filter for the commisioned world. Now we're going to put them all through OACTU and onto a full wage before they hit the EFT filter - how can that ever be cheaper? Especially when you include the ever growing holding fraternity.
Uncle G
Whilst there may be a TGO stating the 'syllabus', that implies some thing is being taught. In aviation ( at this level, at least), that requires a QFI.
Whilst not wanting to undervalue of the vast experience amongst most AEF pilots, they're simply not even close to providing interesting, rewarding fg trg when compared to that that UASs give. Has anyone seen an Air Cadet even half as happy/fulfilled as a UAS stude after his solo formation trip?
I still think that this will cost more in the long run. At the end of the day, the UAS is a filter for the commisioned world. Now we're going to put them all through OACTU and onto a full wage before they hit the EFT filter - how can that ever be cheaper? Especially when you include the ever growing holding fraternity.
Uncle G