Specialist Pay - Flying, Para, Sub etc etc
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You don't think the AT boys want serviceable aircraft fit for the job ?
It's fair to say that sections of the AT fleet are doing tasks that others wouldn't think about with the aircraft we have. We'll leave it at that shall we ?
As for HOTAC, and specifically for the AT fleet, I don't see what the grunts would want us to do when we take them out to Calgary or the Carribean or Brunei for exercises. For our 16 hrs on the ground, having just crossed 5 or so time zone, would you like us to pitch a tent and sleep on the airfield ?
LFFC made some excellent points. When the weather is crap, and things aren't going to plan, you want those sitting in the front to be rested and on the ball, not suffereing from a lack of rest.
Going to sound snobby, but who cares. There is a reason why some people worked hard at school, and if you don't like the tent you sleep in or the trenches you dig, then take it upon yourself to do something about it, instead of whinging that soemone has a better deal. Not saying it applies to anyone here, but it applies to many in the Services as a whole.
It's fair to say that sections of the AT fleet are doing tasks that others wouldn't think about with the aircraft we have. We'll leave it at that shall we ?
As for HOTAC, and specifically for the AT fleet, I don't see what the grunts would want us to do when we take them out to Calgary or the Carribean or Brunei for exercises. For our 16 hrs on the ground, having just crossed 5 or so time zone, would you like us to pitch a tent and sleep on the airfield ?
LFFC made some excellent points. When the weather is crap, and things aren't going to plan, you want those sitting in the front to be rested and on the ball, not suffereing from a lack of rest.
Going to sound snobby, but who cares. There is a reason why some people worked hard at school, and if you don't like the tent you sleep in or the trenches you dig, then take it upon yourself to do something about it, instead of whinging that soemone has a better deal. Not saying it applies to anyone here, but it applies to many in the Services as a whole.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: earth
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roland ..
Yes this is what happens now and has done for some time. A few years ago the first stint was six years, but that has was changed to 3 years long before JPA. What is not explained above is that not all ground tours start the clock runing. If your ground tour is annotated 'flying related' then the clock does not start. However, as staff posts are all being re-defined under the colocated HQ, then less and less are being annotated 'flying related'. (Saves money of course)
I am told that you can always re-start the clock by doing an out of area tour which would count as 'flying related'.
Whether the posters are clever enough to manage (ha ha) our careers so this does not happen remains to be seen.
This to me implies that if you are "out of role" you gradually lose your flying pay. If that is what happens already then I apologise
I am told that you can always re-start the clock by doing an out of area tour which would count as 'flying related'.
Whether the posters are clever enough to manage (ha ha) our careers so this does not happen remains to be seen.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: East of Gibraltar
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this rule is aimed at those hoary old aircrew who have been in the same, non-flying related job for 10 years or more and are actively avoiding doing what they are being paid to do. We all know the type; the last aircraft they saw the inside of is no longer in service. That sort of thing.
The majority of ground jobs that aircrew are sent to ARE flying related. If the poster tries to send someone to a second tour, non-flying job, they need a good kicking and told where to go. If you stay in touch with your own career, it is not too difficult to ensure that this does not happen anyway (as I have found over my 27 years in the RAF). Find the job that you want to do and manoeuvre yourself into it! Always have a backup plan for when it turns to ratsh*t though.
The majority of ground jobs that aircrew are sent to ARE flying related. If the poster tries to send someone to a second tour, non-flying job, they need a good kicking and told where to go. If you stay in touch with your own career, it is not too difficult to ensure that this does not happen anyway (as I have found over my 27 years in the RAF). Find the job that you want to do and manoeuvre yourself into it! Always have a backup plan for when it turns to ratsh*t though.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: St Mawgan
Age: 48
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roland,
Thanks for that update - sorry for the misunderstanding! I've learnt something today...
What was the reference of that document? I'd be interested in taking a look.
Thanks for that update - sorry for the misunderstanding! I've learnt something today...
What was the reference of that document? I'd be interested in taking a look.
Thread Starter
Mead
No document reference, I have just checked, just an MOD/JPA glossy leaflet. JSP 754 is apparently the definitive reference though and as there is little in the way of flying I can do at present I might surf the intranet to see if I can find it.................if I get really bored and run out of other trivial jobs to do!
No document reference, I have just checked, just an MOD/JPA glossy leaflet. JSP 754 is apparently the definitive reference though and as there is little in the way of flying I can do at present I might surf the intranet to see if I can find it.................if I get really bored and run out of other trivial jobs to do!
Roland, have a look on arrsse or whatever it is, I googled the other day and found a link to it (interestingly, detached and posted jobs cease to exist, being replaced with "temporary" and "permanent" attachements based on the length of time the job is envisaged to last - all you holders out there take note....)
