UAS 's to close (Merged)
If you join a UAS and want to continue helping out on your ATC Squadron (or any ATC Squadron), you will have to become a Service Instructor: You cannot be a CI because you are not a civilian!
Can anyone confirm or deny that some UAS student flying is planned to be conducted by non-QFI pilots under the new proposals?
I.e. by 'Staff Pilots' without any formal or current instructional qualifications such as some (though not all) AEF pilots?
I.e. by 'Staff Pilots' without any formal or current instructional qualifications such as some (though not all) AEF pilots?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Age: 58
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beagle,
The version I have heard suggest that some of us ex-QFI AEF pilots will provide EFT(to PPL standard) for free..i am sure some career minded officer costed this in to the investment appraisal to do away with the cheapest recruitment system ever...doh!!!(as allegedly the Simpson's say). The total dismemberment of a brilliant organisation that is about to occur is the final cut as far as I am concerned, best wishes to all those that are still holding on to the light bulb!
p.s. kippermate you were optimistic to think the wings of steel could last as long as they have!!
Trainspotter sends, out!
The version I have heard suggest that some of us ex-QFI AEF pilots will provide EFT(to PPL standard) for free..i am sure some career minded officer costed this in to the investment appraisal to do away with the cheapest recruitment system ever...doh!!!(as allegedly the Simpson's say). The total dismemberment of a brilliant organisation that is about to occur is the final cut as far as I am concerned, best wishes to all those that are still holding on to the light bulb!
p.s. kippermate you were optimistic to think the wings of steel could last as long as they have!!
Trainspotter sends, out!
"ex-QFI AEF pilots will provide EFT..."
That's most interesting and, to some extent, what I feared. Any such 'instruction' carried out by pilots who are neither current QFIs nor civil FIs will not be viewed as valid flight instruction for either a JAR-FCL PPL or a UK NPPL. It will be viewed as 'passenger flying' only.
I raised this point with the CAA recently; current accreditation will most certainly be reviewed should any change occur in current UAS training standards.
That's most interesting and, to some extent, what I feared. Any such 'instruction' carried out by pilots who are neither current QFIs nor civil FIs will not be viewed as valid flight instruction for either a JAR-FCL PPL or a UK NPPL. It will be viewed as 'passenger flying' only.
I raised this point with the CAA recently; current accreditation will most certainly be reviewed should any change occur in current UAS training standards.
But surely getting a formal civil FI cat would be no more than a formality for the average AEF ex QFI?
Surely even re-qualifying and re-categorising such blokes as current QFIs would represent a cost saving compared to employing serving officers or paid (retired) QFIs?
With legions of ex-RAF blokes who would give their eye teeth to 'put something back' and to augment their civvy flying with a bit of light aircraft instruction, I've always been astonished that the RAF hasn't made more use of retired blokes on the UASs. There might even be a suitable resource in the shape of highly experienced PPL-holding, (perhaps instructor qualified) light aircraft pilots who have some service link (serving NCOs, Air Traffickers or engineers, for example) but who may have never worn a brevet. There was an Air Commodore Eng who kept his own light aircraft at Benson, I remember. These are just the sort of blokes who used to form the bulk of the instructors and tug pilots on the RAFGSA, and who might form a useful manpower pool for a cheap, slimmed down UAS system.
Don't get me wrong. I'm firmly of the opinion that UAS instructors should be serving, service QFIs, preferably fresh from an operational tour, who are able to give UAS studes a decent glimpse of the real air force, as well as some flying instruction. I also believe that the best operating location for a UAS is at a busy flying station, with a hectic circuit and a vibrant officers mess.
And UAS flying should be an extra, without streaming decisions at the end point, with sufficient 'flex' to be used instead of EFTS for students who get enough flying and who can get to BFTS without too long a gap. (And of course, in this 'gold standard' FTS system, all studes would do full BFTS on the Tucano before being streamed FJ, RW or ME.....)
But better a cheap, limited UAS scheme than no scheme at all, surely?
Surely even re-qualifying and re-categorising such blokes as current QFIs would represent a cost saving compared to employing serving officers or paid (retired) QFIs?
With legions of ex-RAF blokes who would give their eye teeth to 'put something back' and to augment their civvy flying with a bit of light aircraft instruction, I've always been astonished that the RAF hasn't made more use of retired blokes on the UASs. There might even be a suitable resource in the shape of highly experienced PPL-holding, (perhaps instructor qualified) light aircraft pilots who have some service link (serving NCOs, Air Traffickers or engineers, for example) but who may have never worn a brevet. There was an Air Commodore Eng who kept his own light aircraft at Benson, I remember. These are just the sort of blokes who used to form the bulk of the instructors and tug pilots on the RAFGSA, and who might form a useful manpower pool for a cheap, slimmed down UAS system.
Don't get me wrong. I'm firmly of the opinion that UAS instructors should be serving, service QFIs, preferably fresh from an operational tour, who are able to give UAS studes a decent glimpse of the real air force, as well as some flying instruction. I also believe that the best operating location for a UAS is at a busy flying station, with a hectic circuit and a vibrant officers mess.
And UAS flying should be an extra, without streaming decisions at the end point, with sufficient 'flex' to be used instead of EFTS for students who get enough flying and who can get to BFTS without too long a gap. (And of course, in this 'gold standard' FTS system, all studes would do full BFTS on the Tucano before being streamed FJ, RW or ME.....)
But better a cheap, limited UAS scheme than no scheme at all, surely?
"But surely getting a formal civil FI cat would be no more than a formality for the average AEF ex QFI?"
Such a person would first need a civil licence on which such a Rating could be included. If paid to instruct as a civil FI, that would have to be a CPL. Even if electing to instruct for no pay by including a civil FI Rating on a PPL, he/she would still need 'commercial level knowledge' or to meet FW accreditation criteria. After that, the requirements are clearly laid out in LASORS H1.8; for QFIs, the requirements are:
"Applicants without a CFS Standardisation Check in the
last 12 months are required to complete training at the
discretion of a FIC Instructor at an approved FIC FTO
sufficient to pass the relevant elements of a FI Skill Test
in a single pilot, single engine aeroplane with a suitably
qualified civilian FIE(A)."
For pilots who have never been QFIs, there are NO exceptions to the normal FI(R) requirements.
Such a person would first need a civil licence on which such a Rating could be included. If paid to instruct as a civil FI, that would have to be a CPL. Even if electing to instruct for no pay by including a civil FI Rating on a PPL, he/she would still need 'commercial level knowledge' or to meet FW accreditation criteria. After that, the requirements are clearly laid out in LASORS H1.8; for QFIs, the requirements are:
"Applicants without a CFS Standardisation Check in the
last 12 months are required to complete training at the
discretion of a FIC Instructor at an approved FIC FTO
sufficient to pass the relevant elements of a FI Skill Test
in a single pilot, single engine aeroplane with a suitably
qualified civilian FIE(A)."
For pilots who have never been QFIs, there are NO exceptions to the normal FI(R) requirements.
Last edited by BEagle; 26th Jun 2005 at 21:03.
Well, for a first ever posting, that's a fairly limited contribution.
Would you care to elucidate?
Edited to clarify - this was a comment made following a puerile posting from someone who has now been disappeared, and not a comment on Mummy Croccie's post!
Would you care to elucidate?
Edited to clarify - this was a comment made following a puerile posting from someone who has now been disappeared, and not a comment on Mummy Croccie's post!
Last edited by BEagle; 28th Jun 2005 at 19:02.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: near the squirrel sanctuary
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trainspotter,
Nice to hear from you. Hope all is well. Perhaps it was too much to ask to remain, even slightly, anonymous.
Still, I have no doubt that when the outcome of the UAS review is finally concluded, the information will become available to those it concerns (and I expect still to be one of those). It will then, no doubt, filter its way on to these pages. It some form or another.
Thanks again, Not on Hercs.
kippermate is dead. Long live.............
Nice to hear from you. Hope all is well. Perhaps it was too much to ask to remain, even slightly, anonymous.
Still, I have no doubt that when the outcome of the UAS review is finally concluded, the information will become available to those it concerns (and I expect still to be one of those). It will then, no doubt, filter its way on to these pages. It some form or another.
Thanks again, Not on Hercs.
kippermate is dead. Long live.............
Kippermate
So who's going to fly you down to Crandlitz? Or are you allowed to fly yourself, holding your own collar.................
So we now have Classroom Assistants (mothers with time on their hands) who were rebranded as Teaching Assistants, who, wait for it, are now being allowed to 'Teach' without the supervision of qualified Teachers...............even though they haven't been near a University (or 2 studes in a bus shelter)
Non QFIs to 'teach' flying, all sounds a bit similiar to me.
All very well saying to baby wannabe - this is how I do it, have a go, but one feels that their 'instruction' may miss out the odd lesson learnt from decades of experience collected and passed on by CFS.
Tolerate this and your children will be next!!!!!!!!!!!
So who's going to fly you down to Crandlitz? Or are you allowed to fly yourself, holding your own collar.................
So we now have Classroom Assistants (mothers with time on their hands) who were rebranded as Teaching Assistants, who, wait for it, are now being allowed to 'Teach' without the supervision of qualified Teachers...............even though they haven't been near a University (or 2 studes in a bus shelter)
Non QFIs to 'teach' flying, all sounds a bit similiar to me.
All very well saying to baby wannabe - this is how I do it, have a go, but one feels that their 'instruction' may miss out the odd lesson learnt from decades of experience collected and passed on by CFS.
Tolerate this and your children will be next!!!!!!!!!!!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Up there somewhere
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heard that there will be one QFI per UAS with the rest being AEF style instructors. The boss doesn't even have to be a QFI or pilot I also heard. I hate rumour control....the sooner we hear the better.
Gentleman Aviator
But surely the cheaper (and more sensible) option for ex-QFIs would be for them to regain a CFS "tick" rather than attempt to gain a civilian endorsement, with all the extra hurdles to leap (of which BEags so lucidly reminds us).
Once the brand of the red pelican has been successfully applied, it should require only minimal effort to get back to (at least) C to I status. And if it should prove difficult or impossible (for whatever reason) to achieve C to I, do we really want such people instructing (or even "instructing") our ab initios ?
OK, I know the last was a stupid question ...........
.... but speaking as an ex-CFS staff A2 (OK, as a QHI, but mutatis mutandis and all that), if I couldn't get back to a C to I, I would certainly question myself closely as to whether I should be doing the job!
Once the brand of the red pelican has been successfully applied, it should require only minimal effort to get back to (at least) C to I status. And if it should prove difficult or impossible (for whatever reason) to achieve C to I, do we really want such people instructing (or even "instructing") our ab initios ?
OK, I know the last was a stupid question ...........
.... but speaking as an ex-CFS staff A2 (OK, as a QHI, but mutatis mutandis and all that), if I couldn't get back to a C to I, I would certainly question myself closely as to whether I should be doing the job!
I think we need to get away from the idea that this new form of the UAS will be there to teach undergrads to fly. From what I hear it is to give "air experience" to anybody who shows an interest in any branch of the RAF.
There will be some instruction from a couple of QFIs per flight but the rigid syllabus of the present UAS will go.
HF
There will be some instruction from a couple of QFIs per flight but the rigid syllabus of the present UAS will go.
HF
This thread has now been going for 6 months.
What sort of a message does it send out to the potential recruit that the RAF can't even sort out after over 6 months dicking around whether or not it can afford to give UAS students a few hours flying training in light aeroplanes which it doesn't even own....
Frankly, the whole thing is pretty pathetic. Without proper UAS flying training, there IS no UAS. Do they really think that future pilots will want to join with just the attraction of 3 years of adventurous training and muddy tents with a minor amount of Air Cadet style air experience flying? Many of them will probably have already done a fair bit of air experience flying int the ATC and will want to do something a bit more adult.
PSOs, please include this in your morning PPRuNe brief to your Airships!
What sort of a message does it send out to the potential recruit that the RAF can't even sort out after over 6 months dicking around whether or not it can afford to give UAS students a few hours flying training in light aeroplanes which it doesn't even own....
Frankly, the whole thing is pretty pathetic. Without proper UAS flying training, there IS no UAS. Do they really think that future pilots will want to join with just the attraction of 3 years of adventurous training and muddy tents with a minor amount of Air Cadet style air experience flying? Many of them will probably have already done a fair bit of air experience flying int the ATC and will want to do something a bit more adult.
PSOs, please include this in your morning PPRuNe brief to your Airships!