Commissioned Rearcrew - Will it/Should it Start Again?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Nigit
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Klingon
Thanks for an erudite and balanced reply that finally got the thread back on track.
I think the issue of ambition is very important. I commissioned out of the branch (still flying) as at the age of 27 and having just got my Crown, I had 28 years to push having already instructed and examined and just one promotion to make. Staying as a NCO would have been sole destroying and I would have become bitter and cynical (stand fast...!). There seem to be more talented guys in the branch these days getting promoted to FS quickly, leaving themselves in the same position as me. Unfortunately for them, their only chance of commissioning and taking up the new challenge that brings, is to leave the Branch. Sad for them (and financially unattractive) and damaging for the Branch.
Ambition is one thing, but in an officers' world (and we all know it is) there needs to be an officer branch specialist to fight the guys' corners. One who understands NCA and the issues they face. Even a pilot with exemplary CRM skills will not have the same empathy and understanding as a branch specialist officer. At the moment there are a lot of S/L rearcrew around as they've all had to go on a promotion push to stay in past there 38 points, and as a result the NCA corner is defended to a greater or lesser degree. But for how much longer will this be the case.
BellEndBob
Although I'd like to think the NCO pilot issue has been knocked on the head (at least in this thread I hope), your summation that NCOs would be cheaper that officers is not as true as you may think. Look at the payscales (bearing in mind NCO pilots get the same flying pay scales as officers) and you'll see there's not all that much difference. Trust me. I know.
Thanks for an erudite and balanced reply that finally got the thread back on track.
I think the issue of ambition is very important. I commissioned out of the branch (still flying) as at the age of 27 and having just got my Crown, I had 28 years to push having already instructed and examined and just one promotion to make. Staying as a NCO would have been sole destroying and I would have become bitter and cynical (stand fast...!). There seem to be more talented guys in the branch these days getting promoted to FS quickly, leaving themselves in the same position as me. Unfortunately for them, their only chance of commissioning and taking up the new challenge that brings, is to leave the Branch. Sad for them (and financially unattractive) and damaging for the Branch.
Ambition is one thing, but in an officers' world (and we all know it is) there needs to be an officer branch specialist to fight the guys' corners. One who understands NCA and the issues they face. Even a pilot with exemplary CRM skills will not have the same empathy and understanding as a branch specialist officer. At the moment there are a lot of S/L rearcrew around as they've all had to go on a promotion push to stay in past there 38 points, and as a result the NCA corner is defended to a greater or lesser degree. But for how much longer will this be the case.
BellEndBob
Although I'd like to think the NCO pilot issue has been knocked on the head (at least in this thread I hope), your summation that NCOs would be cheaper that officers is not as true as you may think. Look at the payscales (bearing in mind NCO pilots get the same flying pay scales as officers) and you'll see there's not all that much difference. Trust me. I know.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Prof Stude -
I apologise for subverting your thread; it wasn't my intention. I simply wished to raise the alternatives. Some very fair points have been raised here.
During my service, (Army), I served on a couple of RAF Stns, and interacted with RN and many foreign nations. One can only speak of one's own experiences, and in general, I believe that there are many lessons to be learned from other forces and nations. The Germans, for instance generally commission their officers after they prove themselves as 'officers' under training. IIRC, they are effectively a Cpl for 3 years. In the US, a degree is 90% of the battle. The 'us' and 'them' attitude is simply a destructively divisive policy IMHO.
In this modern, all-informed world, I believe the forces will find recruitment and retention an increasingly difficult task without reform of some archaic practices.
My time in the military has passed; but I still have time and thought for those that serve. We all bat for the same team. Keep safe gents.
I apologise for subverting your thread; it wasn't my intention. I simply wished to raise the alternatives. Some very fair points have been raised here.
During my service, (Army), I served on a couple of RAF Stns, and interacted with RN and many foreign nations. One can only speak of one's own experiences, and in general, I believe that there are many lessons to be learned from other forces and nations. The Germans, for instance generally commission their officers after they prove themselves as 'officers' under training. IIRC, they are effectively a Cpl for 3 years. In the US, a degree is 90% of the battle. The 'us' and 'them' attitude is simply a destructively divisive policy IMHO.
In this modern, all-informed world, I believe the forces will find recruitment and retention an increasingly difficult task without reform of some archaic practices.
My time in the military has passed; but I still have time and thought for those that serve. We all bat for the same team. Keep safe gents.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Nigit
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roadster
That, in effect, is how it was done with the rearcrew branches. It was not possible to commission straight from the streets and one had to prove one's worth "on the job" as it were. That's why (latterly at least, as pointed out by Klingon) most of the guys being commissioned were of a pretty high quality.
As for the NCO pilot thing, I can't see the RAF changing it's policy, especially since the Navy got rid of its knocker pilots some years ago. The RAF is run by pilots FOR pilots. The Army is run by soldiers FOR soldiers. Pilots are JUST "driver-airframes". If I'm correct, even the AAC introduced Rank/Officer status stipulations for AH front/rear seat occupants (please forgive my ignorance if this has now changed). As I said earlier, it's not much cheaper either.
That, in effect, is how it was done with the rearcrew branches. It was not possible to commission straight from the streets and one had to prove one's worth "on the job" as it were. That's why (latterly at least, as pointed out by Klingon) most of the guys being commissioned were of a pretty high quality.
As for the NCO pilot thing, I can't see the RAF changing it's policy, especially since the Navy got rid of its knocker pilots some years ago. The RAF is run by pilots FOR pilots. The Army is run by soldiers FOR soldiers. Pilots are JUST "driver-airframes". If I'm correct, even the AAC introduced Rank/Officer status stipulations for AH front/rear seat occupants (please forgive my ignorance if this has now changed). As I said earlier, it's not much cheaper either.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: inside the train looking onto the platform.
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is clear that since the demise of rearcrew leaders per se that the majority of empowered masters have either not 'stood up to the plate' or been shouted down or undermined by either the Commissioned master races or their own peers who were jealous of their position, 28 SQn was a prime example of the latter. It is time for commissioning from the rearcrew to be brought back as there is no 'grown up' voice to defend or discuss matters inside or outside of the sqn environment (mess bar, where whether we like it or not some work gets done and problems are solved informally).
As for Pontius's comment regarding giving them a rest tour in the Ops spt branch, why would that branch or any for that matter want them in for a rest.
, would they then not go on a 4 month OOA, and why would the branches want them! as the Ops Spt branch is now promoting its direct entrant officers to Sqn Ldr and clearly standing on its own two feet.
So in answer to the original question, yes, bring back commissioning for the rearcrew in their own/WSO branches and give them something to aim for and a voice at the table that is heard. It is also time for those that are commissioned in all the WSO (NCA aircrew branches) to continue to make their collective voice heard or the individuals that can get a commission elsewhere, will do so and do very well as they are doing now, and the Sqns will continue to run short of a valuable aircrew asset.
As for Pontius's comment regarding giving them a rest tour in the Ops spt branch, why would that branch or any for that matter want them in for a rest.
, would they then not go on a 4 month OOA, and why would the branches want them! as the Ops Spt branch is now promoting its direct entrant officers to Sqn Ldr and clearly standing on its own two feet.So in answer to the original question, yes, bring back commissioning for the rearcrew in their own/WSO branches and give them something to aim for and a voice at the table that is heard. It is also time for those that are commissioned in all the WSO (NCA aircrew branches) to continue to make their collective voice heard or the individuals that can get a commission elsewhere, will do so and do very well as they are doing now, and the Sqns will continue to run short of a valuable aircrew asset.
Level 7 Warrant Officer/MAcr £41672 PA
Level 9 Captain/Flt Lt £40190 PA
Actually someone from the senior non commissioned ranks is likely to have to
stand still to allow their JO pay to catch up!!
AFPRB Report 2006
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Nigit
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roland
Very true. I went on to mark time pay for 4 years on commissioning.
Roger
Yes, I'd heard about the 2 guys moving across (and that's part of why I started the thread), but I don't think this is the way ahead. It's not in the service's (or the individual's) interest to train them in another role knowing that they'll leap out of that branch as soon as the opportunity arises. I believe these guys have been picked as a short term defecit has been indentified and there is insufficient time to select and train people. They will no doubt be given grief buy the jealous few who will believe they have "come in by the back door" but needs must, and sometimes you're just in the right place at the right time. In all the previous cases where people have commissioned out of the WSOp branches only swap back again, the service has approached the individual, not the other way round. Show me a man who would refuse the offer and I'll show you a fool.
Saddamslovechild
I think the issue of representation is key. Like it or not, having an officer going into bat at sqn execs is still very important. You and Roger are right in saying that there is lots of dead wood that fails to pull its weight (sometimes considerable weight too) once empowered and does the rearcrew no good at all at exec level. As this dead wood floats off into retirement, the issue will disappear and the young thrusters of the "new" generation will come to the fore, but I fear by then that the damage will have been done by the kind of old-school masters we all know are out there.
Very true. I went on to mark time pay for 4 years on commissioning.
Roger
Yes, I'd heard about the 2 guys moving across (and that's part of why I started the thread), but I don't think this is the way ahead. It's not in the service's (or the individual's) interest to train them in another role knowing that they'll leap out of that branch as soon as the opportunity arises. I believe these guys have been picked as a short term defecit has been indentified and there is insufficient time to select and train people. They will no doubt be given grief buy the jealous few who will believe they have "come in by the back door" but needs must, and sometimes you're just in the right place at the right time. In all the previous cases where people have commissioned out of the WSOp branches only swap back again, the service has approached the individual, not the other way round. Show me a man who would refuse the offer and I'll show you a fool.
Saddamslovechild
I think the issue of representation is key. Like it or not, having an officer going into bat at sqn execs is still very important. You and Roger are right in saying that there is lots of dead wood that fails to pull its weight (sometimes considerable weight too) once empowered and does the rearcrew no good at all at exec level. As this dead wood floats off into retirement, the issue will disappear and the young thrusters of the "new" generation will come to the fore, but I fear by then that the damage will have been done by the kind of old-school masters we all know are out there.
Fly-Friendly
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Around the middle
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prof
Totally agree there have been cases of previous ALM's coming back to be WSOP's after commissioning but only after failing other courses such as ATC and they, as you rightly say were right place right time.
PS I hope its not the individuals I think it is returning to the flying world as we where glad to get rid of them out of branch when we did !!!!
Totally agree there have been cases of previous ALM's coming back to be WSOP's after commissioning but only after failing other courses such as ATC and they, as you rightly say were right place right time.
PS I hope its not the individuals I think it is returning to the flying world as we where glad to get rid of them out of branch when we did !!!!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: inside the train looking onto the platform.
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A certain master from up north who commissioned into Ops Spt got redundancy from said branch and is now back in the rotary world as an auxiliary crewman with the rank of Master.....all power to his elbow. To be honest good luck to all of them the rearcrew rotary world is in a dire position for crewpersons and with one giving 30 days notice and walking at the secret hampshire base and 5 others PVR'ing in the SAR world last month - it aint going to get better.
If there are others jumping from branches to fill gaps then the masses of NCOA have a right tio grumble if they dont have the opportunity to commission into their own branch, nowt to do wiv me tho.
If there are others jumping from branches to fill gaps then the masses of NCOA have a right tio grumble if they dont have the opportunity to commission into their own branch, nowt to do wiv me tho.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Nigit
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SLC
I don't think they're jumping so much as being pushed (OK, gently prodded in the right direction). If they're good guys (and I happen to know that at least one of them IS) then the NCA branches have nothing to worry about. In the short term, them coming across is a good thing, pending OASC being able to fire up the selection procedure again. Despite some useless buggers being picked up years ago (as alluded to by Klingon), OASC pretty much got things right in latter years (at least in the SH world). It would be great if the whole commissioning thing fired back up again, if only because the competition is healthy.
I don't think they're jumping so much as being pushed (OK, gently prodded in the right direction). If they're good guys (and I happen to know that at least one of them IS) then the NCA branches have nothing to worry about. In the short term, them coming across is a good thing, pending OASC being able to fire up the selection procedure again. Despite some useless buggers being picked up years ago (as alluded to by Klingon), OASC pretty much got things right in latter years (at least in the SH world). It would be great if the whole commissioning thing fired back up again, if only because the competition is healthy.
Fly-Friendly
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Around the middle
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prof
sorry didnt mean to say that all are failures, just a high percentage ha ha. I am all for more commissioned WSOP's whatever the state they are in. It will be far better than a first tourist pilot or Nav looking after the lads!!
sorry didnt mean to say that all are failures, just a high percentage ha ha. I am all for more commissioned WSOP's whatever the state they are in. It will be far better than a first tourist pilot or Nav looking after the lads!!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: inside the train looking onto the platform.
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prof stude: Sorry my dear chap I is a little confuzzled! The ones that are PVR ing are bloody good blokes, they are the latest in a long line of rearcrew who are fed up of either the stan or basra, having vertebral degradation through heavy lifting in poor conditions and the operational strain on their families, not to mention getting paid more if they get their feet on the ground with CHC, Bristows etc and having a quality of life that the Mrs will approve of. As for the SARbuoys, they have been sold down the swanny by their lords and masters and will be a thing of the past (all bar 60 blokes/ladies and there is an 18 month moratorium on SH crossovers to SAR so what are the bright NCOA going to do if they cant get a commission in their own branches. Shovel shi-ite in the back of a rotary target/herc/Nimrod or have the stability of 8 to 5 once the novelty of taking the colonel his newspaper at 4 am/delivering bog rolls and plastic knives and forks has worn off.
I know what is needed and so do the the NCOA, yes bring back WSOP Commissions and keep the standards that were maintained in the latter part of past with the exception of the odd one or two they got it right.
I know what is needed and so do the the NCOA, yes bring back WSOP Commissions and keep the standards that were maintained in the latter part of past with the exception of the odd one or two they got it right.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lynehamshire
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rearcrew Commissioning
It seems to me that the way things are shaping up at the moment within the NCA cadre, the Air force is going to have to dangle more and more carrots to the guys, just to keep the limited resources that they do have airbourne.
If that means money...fair enough, that may entice some, however I am sure that there are a great number of guys and gals out there that are keen to further their careers in more traditional ways.....ie commissioning within their branch.
As far as I am concerned, if someone is of both the ability and has the right attitude to fullfil their role within the airbourne environment, then the powers that be should realise that allowing this to occur will in the long run benefit the greater cause. It seems that the Air Force is only to good at seeing the smaller picture and not the bigger and one day in the not too distant future this is going to bite them in the arse.... Big Time !
If that means money...fair enough, that may entice some, however I am sure that there are a great number of guys and gals out there that are keen to further their careers in more traditional ways.....ie commissioning within their branch.
As far as I am concerned, if someone is of both the ability and has the right attitude to fullfil their role within the airbourne environment, then the powers that be should realise that allowing this to occur will in the long run benefit the greater cause. It seems that the Air Force is only to good at seeing the smaller picture and not the bigger and one day in the not too distant future this is going to bite them in the arse.... Big Time !
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Without the opportunity for commission in branch, and the possibility of the career structure that goes with it, for NCA, then the system looses too many able people. Some just don't want it, but some do. Many have left to seek their fortunes in the civilian world. We all know folks (ex NCA) who are now in senior positions in the civil aviation world. How many would have stayed if the oportunity to progress was available? People apply for aircrew because they have ambition!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: On The Road
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my opinion we should bring back the commissioning of NCA ASAP. The Australians did away with it and have now brought it back big time. They realised the whole set up became poorer by not allowing the NCA that wanted to fulfill their full potential to do so. Why don’t we learn from others mistakes? We have been emaciated by someone in PMA who I only imagine is a navigator and has a vested interest in the continuance of his breed. The whole WSO issue has been a bit of a farce for most of us but, I believe, was initiated to protect the navigator cadre. It means they won’t actually be called navs anymore but it was worth the sacrifice. The nav branch was dying out. There will be a few nav jobs left around but the main seats for the future will be in MRA4 (where the pilots do the navigating). The MR2 currently has 2 WSO (nav) and a WSO (AEO). The WSO (AEO) is former NCA 99% of the time. These guys are worth their weight in gold in the main (the odd one or two poorer ones got through but that was a problem with OASC criteria). Currently they are in the majority as aircraft commanders at Kinloss, they have the experience and maturity that most first or second tourist WSO (navs) or pilots don’t. They go on to Sqn Ldr posts elsewhere around the Air Force in the same positions as other commissioned aircrew (but not on as much pay!). Several are Wing Commanders. Several have become pilots and navs on fleets across the board, at least two have commanded sqns recently. The first boss of 5 Sqn ASTOR used to be an AEOp. On the MR2 sqns empowered masters have taken over the leadership and admin roles that the AE ldr used to have but they are still masters. No disrespect there, it’s just that sometimes it’s better to have a sqn ldr being able to support you than a master if the going gets tough at a senior level. Better to have someone who has been in your shoes then got commissioned and commanded a crew and become a sqn ldr writing your report than a nav who (probably) has no real idea what it’s like to be NCA.. In addition the masters are not employed on the aircraft as WSO’s and the tap for WSO (AEO) has been turned off. Now we have a manning problem because the
MR2 is staying in service for longer and we’re running out of WSO (AEO’s). When the MRA4 comes in the potential for having a bright, experienced ex operator in one the TACCO positions has been taken away, thus removing the chance for our best operators to progress and denying them a career in their chosen/ordained path. They will have to retread as WSO (nav) to stand a chance of getting back into what they really know. Why? It’s stupid and may well reduce the potential effectiveness of the MRA4. Remind me again why we went to WSO/op when we still have to identify what type of WSO/op they are? Basically we got stitched in a money saving gambit that was designed to give pilots and navs more flying pay at our expense and to protect the future of direct entry WSO’s. The very term rear crew is derisory. The MR2, for example, cannot fly without ‘rear crew’. Taking flying pay off ‘rear crew’ and sharing it out among WSO (navs) and pilots is derisory and cynical. Remember when the new brevet was supposed to come in almost overnight and was suddenly stopped. That was because there was an announcement on FRI that would have meant giving all WSOs extra money. The re-titling was delayed so that navs could be given one rate and others could be given less. Once that was done the change to WSO could happen, with WSO (nav) fast jet on one rate, WSO (nav) multi engine on another rate and then the scum ex ranker rear crew hoy poloy on another. Dirty game chaps.
By the way, it is obvious that some of you have no appreciation of what our NCA really do. How professional they are as aircrew and what a talent pool they provide. The training they go through to earn their chevrons is tougher by some stretch than that required to gain a commission, or it used to be. The system turns out some very capable people. The reference by BEagle not so long ago about the Nimrod and doughnut scoffing teenagers was particularly ill informed and insulting. Does he have any idea for example how many thousands of hours the crew of XV 230 had and what the average age of the operators was? 40 + years of age, decades of service? How dedicated and professional they were? Obviously not.
Some of out NCA may have been empowered, but more have been embittered by a system with as little understanding of who they are as BEagle, and that’s sad. Lets hope someone has the balls to reverse a poor decision, and sooner rather than later.
MR2 is staying in service for longer and we’re running out of WSO (AEO’s). When the MRA4 comes in the potential for having a bright, experienced ex operator in one the TACCO positions has been taken away, thus removing the chance for our best operators to progress and denying them a career in their chosen/ordained path. They will have to retread as WSO (nav) to stand a chance of getting back into what they really know. Why? It’s stupid and may well reduce the potential effectiveness of the MRA4. Remind me again why we went to WSO/op when we still have to identify what type of WSO/op they are? Basically we got stitched in a money saving gambit that was designed to give pilots and navs more flying pay at our expense and to protect the future of direct entry WSO’s. The very term rear crew is derisory. The MR2, for example, cannot fly without ‘rear crew’. Taking flying pay off ‘rear crew’ and sharing it out among WSO (navs) and pilots is derisory and cynical. Remember when the new brevet was supposed to come in almost overnight and was suddenly stopped. That was because there was an announcement on FRI that would have meant giving all WSOs extra money. The re-titling was delayed so that navs could be given one rate and others could be given less. Once that was done the change to WSO could happen, with WSO (nav) fast jet on one rate, WSO (nav) multi engine on another rate and then the scum ex ranker rear crew hoy poloy on another. Dirty game chaps.
By the way, it is obvious that some of you have no appreciation of what our NCA really do. How professional they are as aircrew and what a talent pool they provide. The training they go through to earn their chevrons is tougher by some stretch than that required to gain a commission, or it used to be. The system turns out some very capable people. The reference by BEagle not so long ago about the Nimrod and doughnut scoffing teenagers was particularly ill informed and insulting. Does he have any idea for example how many thousands of hours the crew of XV 230 had and what the average age of the operators was? 40 + years of age, decades of service? How dedicated and professional they were? Obviously not.
Some of out NCA may have been empowered, but more have been embittered by a system with as little understanding of who they are as BEagle, and that’s sad. Lets hope someone has the balls to reverse a poor decision, and sooner rather than later.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lynehamshire
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NCA
" By the way, it is obvious that some of you have no appreciation of what our NCA really do. How professional they are as aircrew and what a talent pool they provide. The training they go through to earn their chevrons is tougher by some stretch than that required to gain a commission, or it used to be. The system turns out some very capable people. "
Baffy Boy,
Bravo........You dont fancy a job in PMA do you, not that it's my decision, however I would be happy with you fighting my corner!
CRPxGOOD
Baffy Boy,
Bravo........You dont fancy a job in PMA do you, not that it's my decision, however I would be happy with you fighting my corner!
CRPxGOOD
saddam's b'stard
You wouldn't happen to be an ex-master, current NCA desk officer with a completely unbiased support for your mates on a certain helo background?... or is your detailed information with regards to the current predicament one of luck rather than insight?
If you are that man, could you please push for the reinstatement of Commissioning for NCA without limitation on age or detraction of an individuals current TOS where favourable (eg age 55 versus 18/40 or current PAS). Ta.
The Ivory towers location is suspicious! ...My apologies if you are not.
If you are that man, could you please push for the reinstatement of Commissioning for NCA without limitation on age or detraction of an individuals current TOS where favourable (eg age 55 versus 18/40 or current PAS). Ta.
The Ivory towers location is suspicious! ...My apologies if you are not.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
The WSO (AEO) is former NCA 99% of the time. These guys are worth their weight in gold in the main.
(the odd one or two poorer ones got through but that was a problem with OASC criteria
They go on . . . elsewhere around the Air Force . . . Several are Wing Commanders. Several have become pilots and navs on fleets across the board, at least two have commanded sqns recently. The first boss of 5 Sqn ASTOR used to be an AEOp.
what our NCA really do. How professional they are as aircrew and what a talent pool they provide. The training they go through to earn their chevrons is tougher by some stretch than that required to gain a commission, or it used to be. The system turns out some very capable people.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: N Scotland
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Guys,
There are a few things that need to be cleared up here.
Firstly, the RAF will not provide a commissioning route within the rear crew cadre solely to serve the ambition and development of the individual. So, if you are a 40 year old MACR with no further advancement ahead of you in the next 15 years then, sadly, thats life. Enjoy the PA spine and look forward to a good pension (if you took the option) at age 55. I'll explain below why you should not be commissioned unless you are an AEOp [which is easier to write to than WSOP(EW) or WSOP(Acc)], which is a very special case.
The RAF as a whole must benefit from developing many young officers into a small band of very senior air officers. CAS must leave the RAF at Age 55. To get to ACM rank before age 53, he would have passed through 7 ranks between Flt Lt and ACM. Obviously, only 1 person in every 2 years' worth of officer recruits is destined to go the very top. Everyone else is an also ran, and this where it gets tricky for them, particularly the pilot cadre. We need all pilots to be commissioned officers to create the biggest gene pool possible so that we give ourselves the best chance of getting the best blokes/girls in the most important jobs at the very top. And, if anyone believes that the CAS could be anything but a pilot, please leave now. Most pilots at Wg Cdr rank will not make it Gp Capt, let alone ACM, so their palms are read and they are given a choice: fly a desk TFN or leave. Wg Cdrs (without sqns) flying aircraft in the RAF is not an option.
In previous years, prior to the decision to stop rear crew commissions, most senior pilots withour a career ahead of them (Wg Cdr and above) remained in the RAF rather than leave. They filled desk jobs all over the Cmmd HQs and MOD, because the airline industry did not want 40 year old co-pilots. The commissioned rear crew were not considered to be a part of the rat race to the top, so they circulated around the front line as section leaders. The occasional ALM/Eng Ldr who didn't want to remain in a flying role could chase a career up the greasy pole but, for the reasons outlined above, there was a cap on non-pilot progress. Then, someone realised that old rear crew Flt Lts and Sqn Ldrs were having a laugh on their station carousels and so the commissioning was stopped. And, in my opinion, rightly so. The young ALM/Air Eng officer was never going to get above Wg Cdr, so why clutter the gene pool at the outset with also rans.
As an aside about representation, someone mentioned the concept of the Ldr going into bat for the lads with the Sqn Cdr. Yes, that did happen if the Ldr was a crusty old Flt Lt or Sqn Ldr without a career ahead of him. A young Fg Off, wanting a career, will always be mindful of his reporting chain. Swap Old Flt Lt/Sqn Ldr for MACR and the batting bit is maintained at sqn level and I don't buy the bit about officers mess bar/dining room chat. If you believe RAF business can only be achieved with a beer in hand, leave now. If the MACR Ldr wants to do business with his boss, he can do it on the sqn in the proper manner. Any boss who discusses business, that should include his NCA rear crew leaders, while having lunch in the Offrs mess deserves to be shot.
AEOps need to be commissioned because of the need for AEOs. Unless, of course, the plan for the rear crew on the MRA4 changes such that all rear crew on that jet are to be WSOps. Then there will be no need to pollute the pilot gene pool for operational reasons.
Any young person desirous of a commission and a long career in the higher echelons of the RAF: go get a commission as a pilot. If you can't be a pilot, you have no chance of ever becoming an AVM, so set your sights lower and choose another branch.
Our problem today is that many Wg Cdr pilots failing to make the grade for a long career in the air ranks are not now remaining to fly desks. They see the career spine, with temporary flying pay, as a joke compared to the PA spine with its good pension deal. Regional airlines are sprouting up all over the UK and they see the benefits of employing ready made co-pilots for a few years at a time and retired senior RAF pilots are ideal material. Those guys are now leaving huge gaps behind them in the HQs, where quality people are needed to do intelligent and efficient staff work and on the front line where we have taken quality pilots to fill important jobs in the HQs. Navs are the first choice to fill those gaps, but they are becoming fewer, so we are left with.....no-one.
So, we are now back to commisioning rear crew, as publicly stated by the Air Sec at the CAS Conference for WOs on 1 Feb. It is not an open door across all the branches and its one step at a time. One thing is for sure; they will be looking for young people who are prepared to do one tour as a front line leader then leave flying behind them as they try to progress up the greasy pole before age 38, moving from desk to desk on the Career Spine, taking the desk jobs that used to be filled by pilots. A rear crew commission will be not be a flying career.
There are a few things that need to be cleared up here.
Firstly, the RAF will not provide a commissioning route within the rear crew cadre solely to serve the ambition and development of the individual. So, if you are a 40 year old MACR with no further advancement ahead of you in the next 15 years then, sadly, thats life. Enjoy the PA spine and look forward to a good pension (if you took the option) at age 55. I'll explain below why you should not be commissioned unless you are an AEOp [which is easier to write to than WSOP(EW) or WSOP(Acc)], which is a very special case.
The RAF as a whole must benefit from developing many young officers into a small band of very senior air officers. CAS must leave the RAF at Age 55. To get to ACM rank before age 53, he would have passed through 7 ranks between Flt Lt and ACM. Obviously, only 1 person in every 2 years' worth of officer recruits is destined to go the very top. Everyone else is an also ran, and this where it gets tricky for them, particularly the pilot cadre. We need all pilots to be commissioned officers to create the biggest gene pool possible so that we give ourselves the best chance of getting the best blokes/girls in the most important jobs at the very top. And, if anyone believes that the CAS could be anything but a pilot, please leave now. Most pilots at Wg Cdr rank will not make it Gp Capt, let alone ACM, so their palms are read and they are given a choice: fly a desk TFN or leave. Wg Cdrs (without sqns) flying aircraft in the RAF is not an option.
In previous years, prior to the decision to stop rear crew commissions, most senior pilots withour a career ahead of them (Wg Cdr and above) remained in the RAF rather than leave. They filled desk jobs all over the Cmmd HQs and MOD, because the airline industry did not want 40 year old co-pilots. The commissioned rear crew were not considered to be a part of the rat race to the top, so they circulated around the front line as section leaders. The occasional ALM/Eng Ldr who didn't want to remain in a flying role could chase a career up the greasy pole but, for the reasons outlined above, there was a cap on non-pilot progress. Then, someone realised that old rear crew Flt Lts and Sqn Ldrs were having a laugh on their station carousels and so the commissioning was stopped. And, in my opinion, rightly so. The young ALM/Air Eng officer was never going to get above Wg Cdr, so why clutter the gene pool at the outset with also rans.
As an aside about representation, someone mentioned the concept of the Ldr going into bat for the lads with the Sqn Cdr. Yes, that did happen if the Ldr was a crusty old Flt Lt or Sqn Ldr without a career ahead of him. A young Fg Off, wanting a career, will always be mindful of his reporting chain. Swap Old Flt Lt/Sqn Ldr for MACR and the batting bit is maintained at sqn level and I don't buy the bit about officers mess bar/dining room chat. If you believe RAF business can only be achieved with a beer in hand, leave now. If the MACR Ldr wants to do business with his boss, he can do it on the sqn in the proper manner. Any boss who discusses business, that should include his NCA rear crew leaders, while having lunch in the Offrs mess deserves to be shot.
AEOps need to be commissioned because of the need for AEOs. Unless, of course, the plan for the rear crew on the MRA4 changes such that all rear crew on that jet are to be WSOps. Then there will be no need to pollute the pilot gene pool for operational reasons.
Any young person desirous of a commission and a long career in the higher echelons of the RAF: go get a commission as a pilot. If you can't be a pilot, you have no chance of ever becoming an AVM, so set your sights lower and choose another branch.
Our problem today is that many Wg Cdr pilots failing to make the grade for a long career in the air ranks are not now remaining to fly desks. They see the career spine, with temporary flying pay, as a joke compared to the PA spine with its good pension deal. Regional airlines are sprouting up all over the UK and they see the benefits of employing ready made co-pilots for a few years at a time and retired senior RAF pilots are ideal material. Those guys are now leaving huge gaps behind them in the HQs, where quality people are needed to do intelligent and efficient staff work and on the front line where we have taken quality pilots to fill important jobs in the HQs. Navs are the first choice to fill those gaps, but they are becoming fewer, so we are left with.....no-one.
So, we are now back to commisioning rear crew, as publicly stated by the Air Sec at the CAS Conference for WOs on 1 Feb. It is not an open door across all the branches and its one step at a time. One thing is for sure; they will be looking for young people who are prepared to do one tour as a front line leader then leave flying behind them as they try to progress up the greasy pole before age 38, moving from desk to desk on the Career Spine, taking the desk jobs that used to be filled by pilots. A rear crew commission will be not be a flying career.