UASs CUT
Those were the figures quoted when I first arrived at RAFC in 1968. Over the next few years the Valley figures increased commensurate with the Harrier, Phantom and Jaguar coming on stram until it was closer to 50:50 in 1972/3-ish. We UAS studes had been briefed on the forthcoming changes by a visiting Wg Cdr from Cranwell - I distinctly remember asking him to repeat the figures as they were so different to what we'd all expected when we joined. He did so and explained the reasons. But then in 1974/5-ish there were no multi slots at all - apart from cross-overs. 3 guys from a 6 pilot group holding at the RAF Leeming BFTS did a strange course on the Andover before going to the Herc (the other 3 went to ATC etc - of whom one is now a very experienced C-17 captain!); people who hadn't done any ME flying at all did an 'asymmetric' course on the Canberra T4 before going to the Vulcan etc... To get a ME OCU place, you had to have made it as least as far as TWU before being suspended.
Those were the figures quoted when I first arrived at RAFC in 1968
But then in 1974/5-ish there were no multi slots at all - apart from cross-overs. 3 guys from a 6 pilot group holding at the RAF Leeming BFTS did a strange course on the Andover before going to the Herc
people who hadn't done any ME flying at all did an 'asymmetric' course on the Canberra T4 before going to the Vulcan etc... To get a ME OCU place, you had to have made it as least as far as TWU before being suspended.
YS
OK - so the only bit I was mis-briefed on was the output expectation when I was first at RAFC as a Flt Cdt on 99 Entry before we were encouraged to got to University if we could - and enjoy the excellent UAS experience.
The 13GE date I confirm - as I was on 14GE and all who graduated were sent FJ (some had to hold) bar a couple (I think) who went to RW training.
Yes, one of the 'Leeming 6' did go to Valley. Of the Andover guys, one (with whom I'd been on 99GE and at ULAS) sadly died recently after a long career in the ME world.
How did you view the 'SAFT' era of Gp 1 Ph1, Gp2 Ph2 etc? Personally I was very glad just to have missed it and to have benefitted greatly from a full UAS course, then a full JP3/5 course to 'Wings' on 14 GE, then Valley and Brawdy. But then I did the 'pre-Vulcan Buccaneer short course'.........
I guess the 'gold standard' of 90-ish hours on a UAS followed by a common-core full BFTS course for all to 'Wings' standard is just too expensive for our impoverished Defence Budget nowadays?
The 13GE date I confirm - as I was on 14GE and all who graduated were sent FJ (some had to hold) bar a couple (I think) who went to RW training.
Yes, one of the 'Leeming 6' did go to Valley. Of the Andover guys, one (with whom I'd been on 99GE and at ULAS) sadly died recently after a long career in the ME world.
How did you view the 'SAFT' era of Gp 1 Ph1, Gp2 Ph2 etc? Personally I was very glad just to have missed it and to have benefitted greatly from a full UAS course, then a full JP3/5 course to 'Wings' on 14 GE, then Valley and Brawdy. But then I did the 'pre-Vulcan Buccaneer short course'.........
I guess the 'gold standard' of 90-ish hours on a UAS followed by a common-core full BFTS course for all to 'Wings' standard is just too expensive for our impoverished Defence Budget nowadays?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The ‘Gold Standard’ of 90 hours then a full BFTS is, I suspect, rather too expensive (although an extra few ‘flex’ rides on Harrier/Typhoon OCU would probably pay fer 50 hours or so in a Tutor!). I rather favour the system of mid-eighties where uni students flew as they could at weekends with no pressure of an EFTS course. If they did ‘dossy’ degrees – ergo flew their butts off, they progressed to a ‘short’ BFTS which saved 15-20 hours over the long course. If they had done tough degrees then long BFTS was their destiny. Of my short course – all went fast jet bar one who opted fer rotary early on (weirdo!). My fear is that this new ‘Group Hugs’ UAS with a smidge of Air Experience flying and lots of team building bol…ks, will not recruit the kinda Dudes/Dudeess’s required. If the RAF is to be further shrunk however, you can probably recruit enough Rhodes Scholars to fill every Typhoon, without the UAS’s featuring – Sign of the times I’m afraid.
Sadly
Sadbloke
Sadly
Sadbloke
OK - sorry. By 'full BFTS' I meant a common-core course such as we all did on the JP3/5 in the mid-70s. I think that it was around 140 hours, but if you had graduated from a UAS with PIFG/PFB that reduced to around 125 hours.
Whereas now only fast jet streamed pilots are trained at BFTS. ME pilots fly light aeroplanes only (EFT/MELIN) and then the King Air before reaching their OCUs.
90-ish hours of UAS flying training and with the only 'pressure' for UAS student pilots to be a mandatory requirement to achieve PIFG and PFB before starting IOT, then a common-core BFTS course would seem prudent. But allegedly no longer affordable, even though it had always been the norm for what, 2 or 3 decades?
Whereas now only fast jet streamed pilots are trained at BFTS. ME pilots fly light aeroplanes only (EFT/MELIN) and then the King Air before reaching their OCUs.
90-ish hours of UAS flying training and with the only 'pressure' for UAS student pilots to be a mandatory requirement to achieve PIFG and PFB before starting IOT, then a common-core BFTS course would seem prudent. But allegedly no longer affordable, even though it had always been the norm for what, 2 or 3 decades?
Last edited by BEagle; 1st Oct 2005 at 09:57.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roland Pulfrew takes issue with my earlier comment that when the UAS's go, so will the AEF's.
When the Bulldog was withdrawn, as an 'efficiency' measure the AEFs were assigned to share the UASs' aircraft and associated support, engineering, flight safety equipment, etc.
It stretching credibility to suggest that when the UAS's who are to be closed depart, their aircraft and support will still be available to the AEFs at their current locations. The cost per hour would be unsupportable.
So when I suggest that the AEFs (as we know them) are in danger, it is not unreasonable.
Are we to assume that AEF flying will be provided by local civvy flying clubs or are cadets to be bussed megamiles to the proposed superUAS locations?
C&B
When the Bulldog was withdrawn, as an 'efficiency' measure the AEFs were assigned to share the UASs' aircraft and associated support, engineering, flight safety equipment, etc.
It stretching credibility to suggest that when the UAS's who are to be closed depart, their aircraft and support will still be available to the AEFs at their current locations. The cost per hour would be unsupportable.
So when I suggest that the AEFs (as we know them) are in danger, it is not unreasonable.
Are we to assume that AEF flying will be provided by local civvy flying clubs or are cadets to be bussed megamiles to the proposed superUAS locations?
C&B
'Local civvy flying clubs' are not permitted to give joyrides. To do so they would need a full Aircraft Operator's Certificate etc. Not a simple or cheap undertaking.
They could, under appropriate circumstances, give 'trial flying lessons' with FIs - but a bus load of space cadets sent over for such would be stretching credulity!
This whole thing has been sooooo well thought through, hasn't it?
They could, under appropriate circumstances, give 'trial flying lessons' with FIs - but a bus load of space cadets sent over for such would be stretching credulity!
This whole thing has been sooooo well thought through, hasn't it?
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just keep coming back to this thread..................... it's compulsive viewing
Ultimately the real cost of the UAS is not the aircraft or the manpower but the real estate.
Cut the UAS, cut the aircraft costs, cut the manpower cost and then finally cut the real estate = huge savings
It's not difficult to see the mindset is it ? - ultimately the RAF needs far less airfields to accommodate less aircraft (even allowing for RLG's)
yet another big and quick win for the Accountants at PTC.
Arc
Oh - and yes it'll be goodbye AEF's for sure
Ultimately the real cost of the UAS is not the aircraft or the manpower but the real estate.
Cut the UAS, cut the aircraft costs, cut the manpower cost and then finally cut the real estate = huge savings
It's not difficult to see the mindset is it ? - ultimately the RAF needs far less airfields to accommodate less aircraft (even allowing for RLG's)
yet another big and quick win for the Accountants at PTC.
Arc
Oh - and yes it'll be goodbye AEF's for sure
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Sunny (or Rainy) Somerset, England
Posts: 2,026
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it possible for people to read the posts preceding theirs before they hit the "Submit Reply" button.
Let's start again. AEFs are in NO danger whatsoever. Not only has their task of flying air cadets gone up by 25%, but they will now be flying the UAS students as well. UASs are NOT "departing", they are continuing AT THE SAME PLACES under a different guise.
There are NO "Super UAS locations". EFT will be provided at 3 EFT bases, Cranwell, Wyton and Church Fenton. These will have NOTHING to do with UAS flying.
You will note (before you start shouting at me) that I am NOT defending OR supporting OR criticising OR bad-mouthing the new system, I am merely stating facts rather than wild-ar$ed guesses about what is happening in the near future.
Let's start again. AEFs are in NO danger whatsoever. Not only has their task of flying air cadets gone up by 25%, but they will now be flying the UAS students as well. UASs are NOT "departing", they are continuing AT THE SAME PLACES under a different guise.
There are NO "Super UAS locations". EFT will be provided at 3 EFT bases, Cranwell, Wyton and Church Fenton. These will have NOTHING to do with UAS flying.
You will note (before you start shouting at me) that I am NOT defending OR supporting OR criticising OR bad-mouthing the new system, I am merely stating facts rather than wild-ar$ed guesses about what is happening in the near future.
Crashed and Burned
I will state it again C&B, although Wholigan has beaten me to it, THE AEFs ARE NOT UNDER THREAT. In fact their task has just increased by 25% NOT including the additional UAS task that they are now expected to undertake (once their flt cdrs and a chosen few regain their Q (and for BEagle) FI qualifications).
Furthermore there will be an AEF established at St Athan (currently without one) and at Glasgow (where technically there is one but it operates from Leuchars)!
I will state it again C&B, although Wholigan has beaten me to it, THE AEFs ARE NOT UNDER THREAT. In fact their task has just increased by 25% NOT including the additional UAS task that they are now expected to undertake (once their flt cdrs and a chosen few regain their Q (and for BEagle) FI qualifications).
Furthermore there will be an AEF established at St Athan (currently without one) and at Glasgow (where technically there is one but it operates from Leuchars)!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: In the Ether
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C&B,
......and furthermore, the AEFs are funded not by EFT, not by any UAS org, but by the ACO - who in themsleves are a surprisingly powerful organisation. There will, however, be a separate study into AEF operations, as stated in the MoD press release.
The best reasoning that i've heard for this whole thing came from up high - the UAS re-org is to separate EFT and UAS. Allegedly none of the MFTS bidders will operate an EFT, so splitting the UAS and EFT now means that the UAS is fireproof from that side of things as and when it happens - made sense to me (and that was from ACFT)
Uncle G
......and furthermore, the AEFs are funded not by EFT, not by any UAS org, but by the ACO - who in themsleves are a surprisingly powerful organisation. There will, however, be a separate study into AEF operations, as stated in the MoD press release.
The best reasoning that i've heard for this whole thing came from up high - the UAS re-org is to separate EFT and UAS. Allegedly none of the MFTS bidders will operate an EFT, so splitting the UAS and EFT now means that the UAS is fireproof from that side of things as and when it happens - made sense to me (and that was from ACFT)
Uncle G
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tincan Alley
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Tutor aircraft used by AEFs (and formerly the UASs) are provided by VT Aerospace under the LAFT contract. The RAF is committed to 35000 flying hours per year at a certain cost per hour and may use more hours at a reduced rate.
Should the RAF renege on its contract it would still be liable to VT Aerospace for the cost of 35000 hours yearly until the LAFT contract expires in April 2009. It therefore makes sense for the RAF to continue to operate the AEFs until then. After that the future for the AEFs will become much more uncertain. One hopes that the study into the future of the AEFs will report in good time.
Hummingfrog - St Luke Ch 10 V 7 - 'for the labourer is worthy of his hire'.
Expect more long days under the new system, waiting for the weather to clear so the UAS students who have travelled a long way to fly can do so when the weather is suitable for effective instruction. The AEF pilots/instructors/QFIs will be replacing well paid RAF QFIs in order to save the RAF manpower and money. If you end up with many 0800 to 1800 days you should be adequately rewarded.
Be careful what you commit yourself to.
Should the RAF renege on its contract it would still be liable to VT Aerospace for the cost of 35000 hours yearly until the LAFT contract expires in April 2009. It therefore makes sense for the RAF to continue to operate the AEFs until then. After that the future for the AEFs will become much more uncertain. One hopes that the study into the future of the AEFs will report in good time.
Hummingfrog - St Luke Ch 10 V 7 - 'for the labourer is worthy of his hire'.
Expect more long days under the new system, waiting for the weather to clear so the UAS students who have travelled a long way to fly can do so when the weather is suitable for effective instruction. The AEF pilots/instructors/QFIs will be replacing well paid RAF QFIs in order to save the RAF manpower and money. If you end up with many 0800 to 1800 days you should be adequately rewarded.
Be careful what you commit yourself to.
Should the RAF renege on its contract it would still be liable to VT Aerospace for the cost of 35000 hours yearly until the LAFT contract expires in April 2009. It therefore makes sense for the RAF to continue to operate the AEFs until then.
After that the future for the AEFs will become much more uncertain. One hopes that the study into the future of the AEFs will report in good time.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Calm down, calm down.
So, let me get this straight...
The UASs are staying where they are with the aircraft they currently have? If so the AEF's won't be affected.
If the UASs, eg at Woodvale are leaving, it is inconceivable that the AEF there will survive.
I'm confused, and yes, I have read the thread.
C&B
So, let me get this straight...
The UASs are staying where they are with the aircraft they currently have? If so the AEF's won't be affected.
If the UASs, eg at Woodvale are leaving, it is inconceivable that the AEF there will survive.
I'm confused, and yes, I have read the thread.
C&B
UASs and AEFs will stay where they are.
In most cases, the UASs will do considerably less flying training, and the flying that they do achieve will be for Uni undergrads, and not EFTS flying for DE pilots. (Three UASs will continue to provide EFTS flying for these pilots).
It is expected that the excess flying will be absorbed by AEF flying, including AE flying on the UASs for 'ground branch' UAS members.
For the time being.
In most cases, the UASs will do considerably less flying training, and the flying that they do achieve will be for Uni undergrads, and not EFTS flying for DE pilots. (Three UASs will continue to provide EFTS flying for these pilots).
It is expected that the excess flying will be absorbed by AEF flying, including AE flying on the UASs for 'ground branch' UAS members.
For the time being.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: London
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uni recruitment thus far ... has been good! People love the idea of an insight into forces life with some flying thrown in too. I suppose the general public don't know what they are missing out on. As for studes like myself, part way through the course, I can now continue just without assessment. It's a pain, but I know I plan to continue using the trips as instructional flights and not freebies. However, in years to come when our QFI staff leave I don't know what will be on offer. It just happens that we have two QFIs still here who fit into the new squadron structure. If I was a first year I suppose I'd want instructional flying but with no syllabus guideline on offer it'd be difficult to organise! Although there is talk still of an NPPL course?
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Sunny (or Rainy) Somerset, England
Posts: 2,026
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a couple of points of fact.
They are not actually "UASs", they are essentially Elementary Flying Training Schools, and they will provide EFT for DEs and for graduates.
I refer you to a previous post which said:
This is an outline syllabus and may - of course - be amended with time. Who knows?
Three UASs will continue to provide EFTS flying for these pilots
but with no syllabus guideline on offer it'd be difficult to organise
Familiarisation 0:45 (dual)
Effects of Controls 1 & 2 1:00 (dual)
Straight & Level 1 & 2 1:00 (dual)
Climbing & Descending 1/Medium Turns 1:15 (dual)
Climbing and Descending 2 1:00 (dual)
Stalling 1:00 (dual)
Stalling 1:00 (dual)
Consolidation 0:45 (dual)
Circuits 0:45 (dual)
Circuits 0:45 (dual)
Circuits – First Solo 0:50 (dual) 0:05 (solo)
Circuits - Dual/Solo 0:30 (dual) 0:30 (solo)
Circuits - Dual/Solo 0:30 (dual) 0:30 (solo)
Circuits - Dual/Solo 0:30 (dual) 0:30 (solo)
Forced Landings 1:00 (dual)
Forced Landings 1:00 (dual)
Sector Recce/Consolidation 1:00 (dual)
Solo GH/Sector Recce 1:00 (solo)
Steep Turns 0:50 (dual)
Solo GH 1:00 (solo)
Basic Instrument Flying 1:00 (dual)
Solo GH 1:00 (solo)
Basic Instrument Flying 1:00 (dual)
Solo GH 1:00 (solo)
Navigation 1:00 (dual)
Solo GH 1:00 (solo)
Navigation (Landaway) 1:15 (dual)
Navigation (RTB) 1:15 (dual)
Navigation 1:15 (dual)
Solo Navigation 1:15 (solo)
Effects of Controls 1 & 2 1:00 (dual)
Straight & Level 1 & 2 1:00 (dual)
Climbing & Descending 1/Medium Turns 1:15 (dual)
Climbing and Descending 2 1:00 (dual)
Stalling 1:00 (dual)
Stalling 1:00 (dual)
Consolidation 0:45 (dual)
Circuits 0:45 (dual)
Circuits 0:45 (dual)
Circuits – First Solo 0:50 (dual) 0:05 (solo)
Circuits - Dual/Solo 0:30 (dual) 0:30 (solo)
Circuits - Dual/Solo 0:30 (dual) 0:30 (solo)
Circuits - Dual/Solo 0:30 (dual) 0:30 (solo)
Forced Landings 1:00 (dual)
Forced Landings 1:00 (dual)
Sector Recce/Consolidation 1:00 (dual)
Solo GH/Sector Recce 1:00 (solo)
Steep Turns 0:50 (dual)
Solo GH 1:00 (solo)
Basic Instrument Flying 1:00 (dual)
Solo GH 1:00 (solo)
Basic Instrument Flying 1:00 (dual)
Solo GH 1:00 (solo)
Navigation 1:00 (dual)
Solo GH 1:00 (solo)
Navigation (Landaway) 1:15 (dual)
Navigation (RTB) 1:15 (dual)
Navigation 1:15 (dual)
Solo Navigation 1:15 (solo)