RAF News - Air Transport

[light_my_spey]

Having read the `Have Your Say` section of this months fine publication of RAF news just felt somewhat deflated by the AVM`s response to the quite frequent issue of AT struggling to meet the basic requirement to fly our OWN boys and girls around for operational/exercise needs. Dont`t get me wrong, I understand the overstretch currently being felt by the AT gang and that they are obviously being battered with the same restraints as the rest of us, but don`t you think instead of an AVM just saying well `tough poop, that`s the way it is` they should be saying `Your right, this is obscene i`m going to raise the issue with........`
Just feel if your going to play big boy`s games in this world it does actually cost a few quid now and again.
Perhaps i`ve got the wrong end of the stick
Do let me know.

ps. Please read this months edition before you answer!

[Safety_Helmut]

You're right light my spey, its the typical reply you find in RAF News, it's all about the official party line. It's quite sad to read sh!t like that, what is even sadder, is that someone writes it.

S_H

[soddim]

Yes, it is sad that the propaganda is written like that but the reader should realise that it is, by and large, propaganda.

[ALock]

I was wondering

If the AVM would have been given the same 'grand tour' if he was transitting back . Can't remember the last time I saw an AVM on a bus in the middle of the night.

A bit sad really. Do they care that the guys get hacked off?

P. S. I get my RAF News every two weeks. Didn't know there was a monthly edition .

[dallas]

With a fear of sounding like southside, I didn't think the AOC did too bad a job replying. He hasn't got enough stars to do much about the situation - he's just got the job of fronting it. The core of our problems result from having no one person to blame, because those who are in a position to make changes are too busy with political willy waving.

The acid test: go tell your boss about something unjust, poorly thought out, a waste of money or just badly explained. I will guarantee the result will be a shrug because nobody nearby is to blame for anything! That goes certainly above Stn Cdr level.

The AOC has to manage only part of a large organisation focused too heavily on fast jets and fixated with unimportant trivia. While jets are sitting around broken we've got committees discussing things like rucksacks, tactical flashes and the latest, expeditionary air wing badges!

Very few people on an average station have time for aircraft stuff!

[Biggus]

I agree that the situation encountered by 56(R) Sqn, vs AT, on their return from deployment, as described in the RAF News, was 'less than ideal'. However, I am afraid to many of us in the UK armed services it was nothing more than a reality check for 56(R) on the current state of the AT fleet. Many people, from all 3 services, currently face far more disruption, and worse travel arrangements, when returning from Iraq, and no doubt shortly Afghanistan (which are far less hospitable than Cyprus is during a morale building 'jolly', sorry 'Exercise').

The AT fleet has an appalling reputation amongst the Army, often deserevedly so!! I have met people from Iraq trying to get away on their R&R break who have spent all of it on RAF AT!! Now before all the AT guys start jumping up and down, I am not saying it is their fault. ALL the people in the AT world, at least that I have met, crews, movers (yes even movers...!!) are doing their best, but at the end of the day they are being asked/tasked to do too much with too little equipment - which is getting very old, and breaks down with alarming frequency!!! I gather questions were even asked in parliament as to whether the AT fleet could cope with the Afghanistan jaunt on top of everything else - answer equals no, as no doubt any spotters at the end of the runway at Brize can confirm!!

Oh yes, I also doubt 56(R) will get much sympathy for their Fairford to Leuchars coach trip from the boys at Kinloss. My understanding is that Nimrod guys (aircrew and groundcrew) have been bused from Kinloss to Brize (Fairford) and back at least twice (2 round trips, i.e 4 journeys) a year, on their way to and from the sandpit, for several years now!! Not that it receieves much publicity! So much for it being an Air Force!!

[Data-Lynx]

Bias??

The MoD Internet site today offers a detailed statement from the SoS that UK Personnel in Iraq will reduce by about 800 after May roulement.

The Secretary of State said that the reduction in overall numbers was not part of a handover of security responsibilities to the Iraqis, but instead reflected the completion of some security sector reform tasks - developing the Iraqi security forces capabilities, for example by training the trainers and those guarding institutions. It also reflected improvements in the configuration of UK forces.

The statement notes a breakdown on major units that will be in theatre including some elements of air:

Aviation support will continue to be provided by five Merlin, eight Sea King Support Helicopters, and four Lynx. In May, there will be a reduction of two Sea King helicopters. Our support to the Iraqi Navy and our contribution to the coalition taskforce in the North Arabian Gulf, will continue unchanged.

No mention of AT based in theatre? Was the Submission to Ministers provided by the Army?

[Ordynants]

My understanding is that Nimrod guys (aircrew and groundcrew) have been bused from Kinloss to Brize (Fairford) and back at least twice (2 round trips, i.e 4 journeys) a year, on their way to and from the sandpit, for several years now!!

And what a fun journey it is.
The subject of AT to and from theatre was brought up in a couple of questions after the statement but the answer was the usual "these things happen......doing our best.......unfortunate, etc"
If you are particularly bored you can read it all here.http://www.publications.parliament.u...t/60313-07.htm

[wub]

Nothing much changes. In 1978 I was bussed from Lyneham to Machrihanish and back, to support an exercise involving C-130s!