Underated Trades?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: ISK
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coppers (Get the MOD Plods in instead)
Regiment (That's what the Army's for)
PTI's (Make Physical Fitness a secondary duty)
Cooks (Get civvys in, Army do it on deployment)
MT drivers (everyone can drive anyway)
Stackers (Civvies again - make the movers as "combat stackers")
That's all I can think of just now.......
Regiment (That's what the Army's for)
PTI's (Make Physical Fitness a secondary duty)
Cooks (Get civvys in, Army do it on deployment)
MT drivers (everyone can drive anyway)
Stackers (Civvies again - make the movers as "combat stackers")
That's all I can think of just now.......
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East Midlands
Age: 46
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
get a life, and let people use the forum.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: in my combat underpants
Age: 53
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
225 - why don't you try suggesting a few with some reasoned arguement? Then you'd look like you were fishing and might not get flamed for appearing to be a bit dull. There are a lot of people who are under remit to do this sort of thinking - we're getting down past bare bones now in most trades.
As for reddeath - you're fishing just as badly or you really do have no concept of what happens out there
As for reddeath - you're fishing just as badly or you really do have no concept of what happens out there
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
225 Turbo - Shouldn't your title be 'overated trades' ? Underated usually means something is better than it appears initially to be .
As for cutting the fat - look at Jengos and Sengos who manage to avoid the redundancies which seem to plague F/S and WO's doing a very similar job!
As for cutting the fat - look at Jengos and Sengos who manage to avoid the redundancies which seem to plague F/S and WO's doing a very similar job!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Coppers (Get the MOD Plods in instead) - Who does it on deployment?
Regiment (That's what the Army's for) - (As an ex-Infantryman) Agreed.
PTI's (Make Physical Fitness a secondary duty) - Agreed.
Cooks (Get civvys in, Army do it on deployment) - Err, what about MCSU?
MT drivers (everyone can drive anyway) - Agreed.
Stackers (Civvies again - make the movers as "combat stackers") - Lol. The movements trade actually came from supply originally and many stackers go on courses to enable them to do the movers job but do you know how many I've heard of being cross-trained the other way? Oh, and do you think many helicopter crews would want muppets doing TSW given the muppet trades inability to go near an a/c without breaking them?
Regiment (That's what the Army's for) - (As an ex-Infantryman) Agreed.
PTI's (Make Physical Fitness a secondary duty) - Agreed.
Cooks (Get civvys in, Army do it on deployment) - Err, what about MCSU?
MT drivers (everyone can drive anyway) - Agreed.
Stackers (Civvies again - make the movers as "combat stackers") - Lol. The movements trade actually came from supply originally and many stackers go on courses to enable them to do the movers job but do you know how many I've heard of being cross-trained the other way? Oh, and do you think many helicopter crews would want muppets doing TSW given the muppet trades inability to go near an a/c without breaking them?
TAC Int Bloke
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fink PTIs is underr8ted cos we is skill an ded hard an all the blrdz luv us, youse teki an airkrew will jump to our tune now n do lodsa phiz until yr puny body burn!
Thems tha skoff jus coz we got no war roll, r fik as minse, lov mirrors and hangin out wiv hav neked blokes, yous is jus jelus we is the furur of the RAF
Thems tha skoff jus coz we got no war roll, r fik as minse, lov mirrors and hangin out wiv hav neked blokes, yous is jus jelus we is the furur of the RAF
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Several miles SSW of Watford Gap
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=reddeathdrinker;2822902]
Regiment (That's what the Army's for)/QUOTE]
No it's not - The infantry are not there for rear area force protection so who else are you going to get to do it. We, the air component, have some of the most strategically valuable assets in the rear area (if, indeed, in these days of assymetric warfare and the non-contiguous battlespace, there is a rear area) so who would you trust their FP too. With 2 out of 6 RAF Regt Field Sqns currently depolyed on Ops in Iraq and Afghanistan (and likely to remain deployed for the near future so that's 4/6 months deployed, 8/12 months at home, 4/6 months deployed...) it would seem that the UK Military (PJHQ at least) sees a need for them. Interesting, then that you suggest that - perhaps - are most heavily committed force elements can be disposed of.
I'm not a Rock by the way.
Regiment (That's what the Army's for)/QUOTE]
No it's not - The infantry are not there for rear area force protection so who else are you going to get to do it. We, the air component, have some of the most strategically valuable assets in the rear area (if, indeed, in these days of assymetric warfare and the non-contiguous battlespace, there is a rear area) so who would you trust their FP too. With 2 out of 6 RAF Regt Field Sqns currently depolyed on Ops in Iraq and Afghanistan (and likely to remain deployed for the near future so that's 4/6 months deployed, 8/12 months at home, 4/6 months deployed...) it would seem that the UK Military (PJHQ at least) sees a need for them. Interesting, then that you suggest that - perhaps - are most heavily committed force elements can be disposed of.
I'm not a Rock by the way.
Registered User **
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: LONDON
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your thoughts on that Climebear.....................
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree most not all people can drive but you both overlook the point that MT drivers are force extenders in much the same way as tanker crews. Most people cannot drive PSV or HGV.
You fly your jet in, do you then hoof it to MT to get a vehicle?
You fly in to a secret air base somewhere in Oxfordshire. You are out of duty time. You all troop off to Gateway house for a well earned kip until someone is able to drive?
Who prepositioned the vehicle there anyway?
You fly your jet in, do you then hoof it to MT to get a vehicle?
You fly in to a secret air base somewhere in Oxfordshire. You are out of duty time. You all troop off to Gateway house for a well earned kip until someone is able to drive?
Who prepositioned the vehicle there anyway?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Actually TSW are one of the most heavily committed force elements in the RAF at the moment. Interestingly TSW are also the only formed unit in the RAF to have been continually deployed on operations since their inception in 1976 (Op Banner).
(Yes I am ex-TSW)
(Yes I am ex-TSW)
Registered User **
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: LONDON
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Me - "Can you arrange for a vehicle to pick me up from BZN."
MT - "We'll only have the duty driver available at that time because you arrive at the start/end of shifts and the duty driver isn't for pick ups, you'll have to get a hire car."
Me - "What about my weapon?"
MT - "You'll have to sign it into the armoury at BZN then go back and get it another day with an escort."
As for the pre-positioning thing, thats cods. Many techies, suppliers etc have their class 1 and 2 driving licences and under civilian law can quite happily jump into the relevant vehicle types and drive them. In the RAF we have 'A class' and 'B class' drivers, or jobs for the boys as its known.
A prime example of this hypocrisy is shown in the new Oshkosh fuels vehicle. When asked if the suppliers on TSW would be able to drive this vehicle they were informed that they wouldn't be able to as the MT world had put in place a minimum of X amount of hours on articulated vehicles. Of course this all changed when the MT world realised that not many drivers with as many hours as required really want to go digging in and playing soldiers, its a young mans game and hence the requirement was dropped/overlooked.
Registered User **
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: LONDON
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All very true stacker. Sustainment of military operations is most effective when MT is highly flexible rather than highly optimized. Negotiations for MT resources and capabilities should be encouraged to support rapidly evolving tasks and effects-based operations. Transportation of support staff should be independent from geography constraints where possible.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
movadinkampa747 - Been on any courses recently? You sound very managerial in a 'neu-RAF' way.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Englandshire, mostly.
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Registered User **
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: LONDON
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the most important things we learnt was that Cohesive, adaptable, and responsive MT requires sophisticated vehicle support that enables passenger sharing, a common perspective of the task, early awareness of resource consumption and needs, commitment to pick up the crew, and support for that crew in need.