A flying Air Trafficer!!!!?????
Bracketsew, Sorry your argument does not hold water. We are not talking about a bagger here who sits and assists the pilot on takeoff, landing and is then responsible for the navigation and tactical employment of the airframe.
We are talking about a portable ops room, with a whole host of specialists to look after the airframe itself.
Yes, it is a valuable asset and I understand totally the comments about those post re employment. However, I still contend that you are all being parochial. Not one person has posted a valid reason why this person cannot do the job. He is British, a crab, an aviation specialist and probably very good if PMA is sending him to do this task.
It is no different to ATCOs in 1ACC, or ATCOs on a ship, or ATCOs in the CAOC, or ATCOs Iraqistan. Different platform, same old sh!t. It depends totally on the calibre of the individual, not the colour of their uniform or the shape or style of their brevet.
Come on Ireland!
We are talking about a portable ops room, with a whole host of specialists to look after the airframe itself.
Yes, it is a valuable asset and I understand totally the comments about those post re employment. However, I still contend that you are all being parochial. Not one person has posted a valid reason why this person cannot do the job. He is British, a crab, an aviation specialist and probably very good if PMA is sending him to do this task.
It is no different to ATCOs in 1ACC, or ATCOs on a ship, or ATCOs in the CAOC, or ATCOs Iraqistan. Different platform, same old sh!t. It depends totally on the calibre of the individual, not the colour of their uniform or the shape or style of their brevet.
Come on Ireland!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lincs
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This just goes to show how completely out of touch those incompetant fools at PMA really are. Obviously, this guy has a 'guiding light' somewhere high up for this to happen, but it nothing short of disgraceful.
The guy is NOT aircrew, and he will (almsot certainly) not have gone through aircrew selection - disgraceful and unfair to both him and his contempories alike. Likewise, he won't have to do the same survival courses or other training that ALL real aircrew have to go through and have to pass before they are able to continue, irrespective of their dicipline.
If people, from any background want to become aircrew, then they should be given all the encouragement, support and help possible in their quest. For someone like this to sneak in through the back door is shameful, and I just hope that he fails, not so much for him and the rest of us, but so that the lunatics down at the PMA assylum finally understand that the OASC at cranwell is there for a reason! And a reason that has worked for many years (and at Biggin prior to that!)
I'm boiling and need to take some medication!
TSM
The guy is NOT aircrew, and he will (almsot certainly) not have gone through aircrew selection - disgraceful and unfair to both him and his contempories alike. Likewise, he won't have to do the same survival courses or other training that ALL real aircrew have to go through and have to pass before they are able to continue, irrespective of their dicipline.
If people, from any background want to become aircrew, then they should be given all the encouragement, support and help possible in their quest. For someone like this to sneak in through the back door is shameful, and I just hope that he fails, not so much for him and the rest of us, but so that the lunatics down at the PMA assylum finally understand that the OASC at cranwell is there for a reason! And a reason that has worked for many years (and at Biggin prior to that!)
I'm boiling and need to take some medication!
TSM
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lake District
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From a comment earlier on in this thread I've a sneaky feeling I might know this person...poss LO at this point...But say he actually had a brevet from his life before being ATC and being commissioned and had never stopped wearing it would that makes peoples blood boil any less?
As an aside I'm posted into the AWACS world soon 'ish' and many of you are making it sound about as attractive as a steaming s**t sandwich with references to lack of CRM and rearcrew appreciation (I don't mean a lack of rounds of applause...just what we actually do!)...
As an aside I'm posted into the AWACS world soon 'ish' and many of you are making it sound about as attractive as a steaming s**t sandwich with references to lack of CRM and rearcrew appreciation (I don't mean a lack of rounds of applause...just what we actually do!)...
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,583
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
34 Posts
More Thought and Less Impetuosity.
SM,
I am afraid that you are out of touch - all ab-initio E-3D personnel have to carry out pre-employment aircrew training at Cranwell before arriving at Waddington. This training includes the 2 week survival training course (including "moor-trek") that we all have had to do as aircrew. You will also find, if "yeller-gait" is to be believed, that the air trafficer in question is ex-aircrew but moved following commissioning. Now if you think that NCA training does not prepare an individual for the Sentry, then.......
There apears to be a lot of instinctive hot air and a lack of thought on this subject. PMA are trying something out. If it works, all well and good - if it doesn't then I am sure that the E-3D Component will have words on the matter and the experiment will cease. I speak as the subject of an "experiment" in the 1980s, when only FC ground qualified personnel were entitled to fly on NAEW (and I wasn't). (Now there are several people who know me who claim that this experiment failed), however the result is that AEO/AEOps and Navs as well as FC/TG12 are used as surveillance mission crew on the E-3D. Perhaps we should see how this next experiment works before blowing yet more hot air from our boiling tops. You never know but it may well work!
I am afraid that you are out of touch - all ab-initio E-3D personnel have to carry out pre-employment aircrew training at Cranwell before arriving at Waddington. This training includes the 2 week survival training course (including "moor-trek") that we all have had to do as aircrew. You will also find, if "yeller-gait" is to be believed, that the air trafficer in question is ex-aircrew but moved following commissioning. Now if you think that NCA training does not prepare an individual for the Sentry, then.......
There apears to be a lot of instinctive hot air and a lack of thought on this subject. PMA are trying something out. If it works, all well and good - if it doesn't then I am sure that the E-3D Component will have words on the matter and the experiment will cease. I speak as the subject of an "experiment" in the 1980s, when only FC ground qualified personnel were entitled to fly on NAEW (and I wasn't). (Now there are several people who know me who claim that this experiment failed), however the result is that AEO/AEOps and Navs as well as FC/TG12 are used as surveillance mission crew on the E-3D. Perhaps we should see how this next experiment works before blowing yet more hot air from our boiling tops. You never know but it may well work!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,583
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
34 Posts
Don't Knock It.
VF,
There are a few hot heads spouting off without much thought at the moment. Whilst not perfect and starting to show its age, the E-3D is still a cracking piece of kit, and we may have ended up with Nimrod AEW which certainly was not. In these days of traditionally knocking everything in sight, I consider myself to have been fortunate to be a "Mushroom Farmer" during many live operations. Having been airborne during many important episodes (fall of Sebrenica springs to mind) I knew exactly what was happening as part of the C3 network during the crucial phase of the operation. (I don't have to rely upon the gutter press to know what actually happened).
There are lots of things hppening in the background at Waddington as the business ethos and leaning starts to take hold. However, this does not change the fact that the E-3 is a major piece of C3 kit and you will definately be involved should the pace of operations pick up. (Not cost effective to send E-3 out East with only 7 Harriers and a few Helos in theatre - risk/expense not worth it without DAS).
If you want to PM me, I can get in touch to allay any fears that you may have about joining the fleet. I have enjoyed myself for many years at Waddington and I see no reason for you to think otherwise despite one or 2 changes now taking place. In which other platform could you be copying down the coordinates to dump a JDAM into a certain dictator's favourite restaurant?
Enjoy!!
There are a few hot heads spouting off without much thought at the moment. Whilst not perfect and starting to show its age, the E-3D is still a cracking piece of kit, and we may have ended up with Nimrod AEW which certainly was not. In these days of traditionally knocking everything in sight, I consider myself to have been fortunate to be a "Mushroom Farmer" during many live operations. Having been airborne during many important episodes (fall of Sebrenica springs to mind) I knew exactly what was happening as part of the C3 network during the crucial phase of the operation. (I don't have to rely upon the gutter press to know what actually happened).
There are lots of things hppening in the background at Waddington as the business ethos and leaning starts to take hold. However, this does not change the fact that the E-3 is a major piece of C3 kit and you will definately be involved should the pace of operations pick up. (Not cost effective to send E-3 out East with only 7 Harriers and a few Helos in theatre - risk/expense not worth it without DAS).
If you want to PM me, I can get in touch to allay any fears that you may have about joining the fleet. I have enjoyed myself for many years at Waddington and I see no reason for you to think otherwise despite one or 2 changes now taking place. In which other platform could you be copying down the coordinates to dump a JDAM into a certain dictator's favourite restaurant?
Enjoy!!
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Lincoln
Age: 54
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Folks.....hang on a mo. Is this thread about slagging those of us on the E-3D or having a debate about PMA and who should or shouldn't be allowed the chance at the SO slot? Yes, yes, I am on said frame and yes, you will be right in thinking I am not 'real' aircrew (whatever that means) in that I'm an FC! (Weapons of course)
However, I feel that because I have gone through the 'mill' and have accumulated 3.5k hours in all major Op areas allows me to join your thread and pass comment, maybe even enlighten.
For TSM - I suggest that you PM me and I can arrange for a little visit for you to see what the conversion course actually entails.
First off - The 'studes' now do pre-employment trg at the college of knowledge (not at Waddo). They cover all aspects of airmanship, survival drills, radar theory, EW, navigation etc. I am not aware of the Apr Cse not doing so but will certainly enquire. My understanding is that it is to be an additional 'full' SCC too but again I will certainly check before jumping to conclusions that they are making it up as they go along! I also understand that 'the studes' even get to fly at the college......in fact they do pretty much everything that an ab-initio WSO would get in fact. It's just that by the time we get them they tend to have been around the block for some considerable time and so don't need to redo all that 'out in the field carrying pinepoles stuff' and learning how to iron shirts again.
Secondly - Give those that are selected a little bit of credit folks.....yes they may be missing an eagle with their rank badge but they have an equally important range of experiences that can be passed on. They don't just turn up and learn how to use the kit whilst sitting down the back without a care in the world. They should be and are an integrated part of the team with diverse skills that allow us to provide a service to other air, sea and land forces.
But whilst your fleets are working harder than most, I can see why PMA would not want to drain those manpower reserves further....I'm not saying its right! I'm also not convinced that a qualified controller should be going SO...we are short of controllers too. However, I have heard that the individual chosen may have some maritime background and that he is a good trg risk prior to the finalisation of the ATC/FC study that is on going. Perhaps we'll then see ATC forcing me back to my hole in the ground and losing my flying pay! I don't keep mine because I'm not 'real' aircrew.
Lastly - regardless of whether it's right or wrong of PMA to offer up a slot normally taken by WSOs or FC/TG12, surely it cannot be right for any professional aviator to HOPE that the individual fails!!!!! now that is unprofessional
SA
However, I feel that because I have gone through the 'mill' and have accumulated 3.5k hours in all major Op areas allows me to join your thread and pass comment, maybe even enlighten.
For TSM - I suggest that you PM me and I can arrange for a little visit for you to see what the conversion course actually entails.
First off - The 'studes' now do pre-employment trg at the college of knowledge (not at Waddo). They cover all aspects of airmanship, survival drills, radar theory, EW, navigation etc. I am not aware of the Apr Cse not doing so but will certainly enquire. My understanding is that it is to be an additional 'full' SCC too but again I will certainly check before jumping to conclusions that they are making it up as they go along! I also understand that 'the studes' even get to fly at the college......in fact they do pretty much everything that an ab-initio WSO would get in fact. It's just that by the time we get them they tend to have been around the block for some considerable time and so don't need to redo all that 'out in the field carrying pinepoles stuff' and learning how to iron shirts again.
Secondly - Give those that are selected a little bit of credit folks.....yes they may be missing an eagle with their rank badge but they have an equally important range of experiences that can be passed on. They don't just turn up and learn how to use the kit whilst sitting down the back without a care in the world. They should be and are an integrated part of the team with diverse skills that allow us to provide a service to other air, sea and land forces.
We are not just 'goats' who bleat and eat as most seem to think of us!
The problem is that we are short of skilled personnel...and I know that that is an issue across the board. Yes, we would like more WSOs of SNCO and O rank to join us. As most of you have quite rightly pointed out, your fleets are working very hard at present and I for one sympathise with you all. Trust me when I say I'm not happy sitting on the sidelines.But whilst your fleets are working harder than most, I can see why PMA would not want to drain those manpower reserves further....I'm not saying its right! I'm also not convinced that a qualified controller should be going SO...we are short of controllers too. However, I have heard that the individual chosen may have some maritime background and that he is a good trg risk prior to the finalisation of the ATC/FC study that is on going. Perhaps we'll then see ATC forcing me back to my hole in the ground and losing my flying pay! I don't keep mine because I'm not 'real' aircrew.
Lastly - regardless of whether it's right or wrong of PMA to offer up a slot normally taken by WSOs or FC/TG12, surely it cannot be right for any professional aviator to HOPE that the individual fails!!!!! now that is unprofessional
SA
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Road to Nowhere
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry in advance about slight thread drift.
Don't have all the gen about the April Cse, but I believe 2 of the FCs (one FA, one WC) on the cse are ex E-3D, so should need the bare minimum of PET; can't speak for the others though.
As someone who was never sufficiently special to be given the opportunity for E-3D duties (despite asking many times) I speak as a long-term bunker dweller.
Many of the comments here are rather disappointing and echo past lines from 'proper aircrew' that I honestly hoped had been put to one side. At the end of the day, we must put people with the necessary skill sets in the correct place to be most effective; I have heard this called 'effects-based posting'! I have no snags with people having to complete appropriate PET, but having spoken to many victims, some of this seems to be based on jumping through hoops as much as it is about meeting genuine trg objectives; certainly SA sums this up when he says:
The thing that irks me somewhat is that we are very short of FCs, and with the current low rate of E-3D employment, I wonder how long we can continue keeping FCs on the ground at Waddo whilst FJs can't get GCI - especially when the individuals concerned could be at a CRC (or even 1ACC) in the same time as it takes from 'brakes-off' to 'On-Stn' in UK5. Then again, no-one could get the E-3D WCs to use the MASE when it was at Waddo, so perhaps I shouldn't hold my breath
.
Blue Touch-paper lit, retires to get coat!
Don't have all the gen about the April Cse, but I believe 2 of the FCs (one FA, one WC) on the cse are ex E-3D, so should need the bare minimum of PET; can't speak for the others though.
As someone who was never sufficiently special to be given the opportunity for E-3D duties (despite asking many times) I speak as a long-term bunker dweller.
Many of the comments here are rather disappointing and echo past lines from 'proper aircrew' that I honestly hoped had been put to one side. At the end of the day, we must put people with the necessary skill sets in the correct place to be most effective; I have heard this called 'effects-based posting'! I have no snags with people having to complete appropriate PET, but having spoken to many victims, some of this seems to be based on jumping through hoops as much as it is about meeting genuine trg objectives; certainly SA sums this up when he says:
by the time we get them they tend to have been around the block for some considerable time and so don't need to redo all that 'out in the field carrying pinepoles stuff' and learning how to iron shirts again.
.Blue Touch-paper lit, retires to get coat!
Inter Arma Enim Silentius Lex Legis
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually I wasn't going to post on this, knowing how emotive the non-aircrew issue is on E3D's. However I consider I have more experience that some of the drivel writers on here because before I became a Spec Aircrew Plastic Sgt (Air Eng A) I spent 14 long years as an L Tech AD. I worked in the bunker environment with a number of Officers and SNCO's some of whom eventually became my crew mates on 8 and 23 Sqn's. I served at such wonderful places as Bishops Court, Staxton Wold and Boulmer as well as some not so nice places. I have always had the utmost admiration and respect for any one who controls from within a bunker environment, the chop rate to get there is amongst the highest in the RAF and with a daily portion of crap to match it.
I have always viewed the "you are not real aircrew" debate with a great deal of interest and at times sadness. The bottom line is that the rear end of an E3D is not much different to the R3 at Boulmer; it exists to perform the C3 function but in an AEW environment. It doesn't matter who sits in the individual seats as long as they are Qualified and Competent to fulfil those roles. Whether the seat is occupied by an Aeop, Nav, FC brevet or ATC with an FC brevet matters not one Iota, except maybe to some sadly over inflated egos.
As with everything in life there are good guys and not so good guys. Some E3D mission crew behave like real aircrew some do not. A lot of the time I found it was the real aircrew (I hate that expression!) who behaved like ground crew temporarily filling a flying post. As for the comment that mission crew are treated no better than passengers which may be true sometimes, I learnt my lesson early on when I decided that mission crew could be trusted to have situational awareness re the seatbelt sign. On one of my early trips into Aviano after what was then at any rate a long ten hour flight, I switched the seatbelt sign off before the steps were in. Big mistake as the weapons row went into schoolboys at the going home bell mode.
As others have alluded to, one of the E3’s strength is the fact it has such a rich and diverse gene pool of different trades to draw from. If the ATC experiment doesn’t work out then so be it but you have to at least give it a try. Is it any different from the proposal to put a Loadmaster on the next SCC and convert him to a Flight Engineer?
I have always viewed the "you are not real aircrew" debate with a great deal of interest and at times sadness. The bottom line is that the rear end of an E3D is not much different to the R3 at Boulmer; it exists to perform the C3 function but in an AEW environment. It doesn't matter who sits in the individual seats as long as they are Qualified and Competent to fulfil those roles. Whether the seat is occupied by an Aeop, Nav, FC brevet or ATC with an FC brevet matters not one Iota, except maybe to some sadly over inflated egos.
As with everything in life there are good guys and not so good guys. Some E3D mission crew behave like real aircrew some do not. A lot of the time I found it was the real aircrew (I hate that expression!) who behaved like ground crew temporarily filling a flying post. As for the comment that mission crew are treated no better than passengers which may be true sometimes, I learnt my lesson early on when I decided that mission crew could be trusted to have situational awareness re the seatbelt sign. On one of my early trips into Aviano after what was then at any rate a long ten hour flight, I switched the seatbelt sign off before the steps were in. Big mistake as the weapons row went into schoolboys at the going home bell mode.
As others have alluded to, one of the E3’s strength is the fact it has such a rich and diverse gene pool of different trades to draw from. If the ATC experiment doesn’t work out then so be it but you have to at least give it a try. Is it any different from the proposal to put a Loadmaster on the next SCC and convert him to a Flight Engineer?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lincs
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sentry Agitator,
Perhaps in hindsight, to hope that the individual fail was out of order, but I did explain that it was so PMA could see that what they were doing is wrong.
I respect your comments and views, but I disagree with them. There is a perfectly good tried and proven system for the selection of aircrew, irrespective of whether you like it or not, and that is via OASC.
Its their job! Its what they do! They don't just sit there all day for the fun of it, they select RAF, AAC and RN aircrew and have an immense amount of experience in doing that. They are respected world-wide, hence why many other Air Forces etc use them. They know what they are looking for, and more importantly what they are NOT!
My concern is that they have been taken out of the loop, and that is wrong, both for them and those real aircrew they are joining.
I have seen it happen on the E-3 fleet since day one, even out at GK it happened. You can imagine the problems out there can't you? At least in the RAF you know (knew) that all the aircrew you fly with have achieved at least the same standard as you have in everything from airmanship, to survival to personal stability and temperement. I think that it is important, for all concerned.
Those 'non aircrew' have got there by whatever method, and irrespective of whether they are good or bad (and there are some damned good ones, I readily agree) they have by-passed the tried and proven system for aircrew selection. As an experienced E-3 FC in the past couple of years, you will be aware of one fairly serious event that took place. One of those involved frankly should never have gotten on to the fleet, but he did. He got there because of the 'old boy' network, and you know thats how it happens as well as I do. I would suggest that the individual would have been 'weeded out' at OASC if only............
Listen, I have nothing against these people on a personal level, and I'm sure they are all good guys and some will make good aviators. My concern is that this is the thin end of the wedge, and should stop forthwith. If they want to be aircrew, then go off and become aircrew, like the rest have done.
The majority of FCs think its a 'cushy life' but who are the ones doing all the bleating? Even in Aviano? Oh it was hell for us all, living in hotels, on rates, absolute hell wasn't it? They want to try life on a Nimrod sqn for a few months, then they would see what hell is really like. And whilst we are on about it, do you remember when Thumrait kicked off? it was a joke, the PVR rate amongst FCs went thru' the roof didn't it? As for female FCs, Oh dear, thats another forum!!
Standing by for the flak, kind regards
TSM
Perhaps in hindsight, to hope that the individual fail was out of order, but I did explain that it was so PMA could see that what they were doing is wrong.
I respect your comments and views, but I disagree with them. There is a perfectly good tried and proven system for the selection of aircrew, irrespective of whether you like it or not, and that is via OASC.
Its their job! Its what they do! They don't just sit there all day for the fun of it, they select RAF, AAC and RN aircrew and have an immense amount of experience in doing that. They are respected world-wide, hence why many other Air Forces etc use them. They know what they are looking for, and more importantly what they are NOT!
My concern is that they have been taken out of the loop, and that is wrong, both for them and those real aircrew they are joining.
I have seen it happen on the E-3 fleet since day one, even out at GK it happened. You can imagine the problems out there can't you? At least in the RAF you know (knew) that all the aircrew you fly with have achieved at least the same standard as you have in everything from airmanship, to survival to personal stability and temperement. I think that it is important, for all concerned.
Those 'non aircrew' have got there by whatever method, and irrespective of whether they are good or bad (and there are some damned good ones, I readily agree) they have by-passed the tried and proven system for aircrew selection. As an experienced E-3 FC in the past couple of years, you will be aware of one fairly serious event that took place. One of those involved frankly should never have gotten on to the fleet, but he did. He got there because of the 'old boy' network, and you know thats how it happens as well as I do. I would suggest that the individual would have been 'weeded out' at OASC if only............
Listen, I have nothing against these people on a personal level, and I'm sure they are all good guys and some will make good aviators. My concern is that this is the thin end of the wedge, and should stop forthwith. If they want to be aircrew, then go off and become aircrew, like the rest have done.
The majority of FCs think its a 'cushy life' but who are the ones doing all the bleating? Even in Aviano? Oh it was hell for us all, living in hotels, on rates, absolute hell wasn't it? They want to try life on a Nimrod sqn for a few months, then they would see what hell is really like. And whilst we are on about it, do you remember when Thumrait kicked off? it was a joke, the PVR rate amongst FCs went thru' the roof didn't it? As for female FCs, Oh dear, thats another forum!!
Standing by for the flak, kind regards
TSM
Guest
Posts: n/a
Old Swingy, you're having a laugh aren't you?
Some of the most temperementally unstable, non-team playing, selfish unstable individuals I have ever met have a badge on their left brest 
Looking at OASC, many, many, many ATC and FC have passed exactly the same tests. Why are they not aircrew? Well, it could have been for a plethora of reasons: arms to long/short, eyesight, very limited intake, no inclination to be a winch-weight etc etc.
So, trying to keep the discussion on track, can someone please explain to this non-aircrew 'mate', exactly what part of 'airmanship' is required to operate from the back of an E3? I only ask because there appears to be some well-informed people on this thread who don't have a problem with the concept.
all the aircrew you fly with have achieved at least the same standard as you have in everything from airmanship, to survival to personal stability and temperement
Looking at OASC, many, many, many ATC and FC have passed exactly the same tests. Why are they not aircrew? Well, it could have been for a plethora of reasons: arms to long/short, eyesight, very limited intake, no inclination to be a winch-weight etc etc.
So, trying to keep the discussion on track, can someone please explain to this non-aircrew 'mate', exactly what part of 'airmanship' is required to operate from the back of an E3? I only ask because there appears to be some well-informed people on this thread who don't have a problem with the concept.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hiq et Ubique
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"In which other platform could you be copying down the coordinates to dump a JDAM into a certain dictator's favourite restaurant?"
....errrm, how about the other UK ISTAR asset(s) that watch him go into the restaurant in the first place?
Must be great flying on such an important platform. I do envy you, I really do, no really, honest, a-ha, yep, great.
....errrm, how about the other UK ISTAR asset(s) that watch him go into the restaurant in the first place?
Must be great flying on such an important platform. I do envy you, I really do, no really, honest, a-ha, yep, great.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Notts
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come On!
Having read through this thread, I couldn't stop myself from reactivating my PPRUNE account after a few years in the wilderness.
Lots of hot air being thrown around by "Real Aircrew" unhappy with flying airtraffikers. I mean come on.. do people really need to get so wound up
Surely if he/she does his PET the OCU, EW, NAV,SERE etc etc training, the other airmanship qualities will surely be gained with experience.
Whether it be a PMA, Trade Grp or an RAF issue. The chap in question is there for a reason, for the skills he has and what he can bring to the party.
Enjoyed the piece by Sentry Agitator, who managed to put it in clear, plain English. As for people talking about JDAM co-ords, STORMSHADOW, people walking into restaurants, can't you just leave that to the TG14 specialists, you know, those chaps filling the back seats of SENTINEL sat with "Real Aircrew" (who have done the Imagery courses) yet working as one team.
As for Sebrenica?? Cant remember that one! Must have been important though
Come on chaps: Lets work together, its a damn small Air Force and getting smaller! Last thing we need is a them and us attitude. We all strive to be professional, whatever background.
Lots of hot air being thrown around by "Real Aircrew" unhappy with flying airtraffikers. I mean come on.. do people really need to get so wound up
Surely if he/she does his PET the OCU, EW, NAV,SERE etc etc training, the other airmanship qualities will surely be gained with experience.Whether it be a PMA, Trade Grp or an RAF issue. The chap in question is there for a reason, for the skills he has and what he can bring to the party.
Enjoyed the piece by Sentry Agitator, who managed to put it in clear, plain English. As for people talking about JDAM co-ords, STORMSHADOW, people walking into restaurants, can't you just leave that to the TG14 specialists, you know, those chaps filling the back seats of SENTINEL sat with "Real Aircrew" (who have done the Imagery courses) yet working as one team.
As for Sebrenica?? Cant remember that one! Must have been important though
Come on chaps: Lets work together, its a damn small Air Force and getting smaller! Last thing we need is a them and us attitude. We all strive to be professional, whatever background.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having read this thread through twice, I can't believe that so many of you have managed to completely miss the point that was originally raised.
It's not about who can or can't do the job, I'm sure that anyone with half a brain cell can eventually grasp the surveillance job, as I'm lead to believe it's not that arduous. But, that said, London Mil the job is in the air and airmanship is always a factor when things go wrong and they often do. The ability to react to situations and emergencys in the air is the priority of everyone. Sentry agitator, to say PET at Cranwell is on par with Wsop training is frankly insulting to all of those who have done the Wsop course or AEOp course. It's entirely different.
I think the point PB was making that there is a host of aircrew trades sat in ground tours, trained and prepared to go flying again. All this taking people out of their ground enviroments , putting them through the system costs money!!!!
I can't believe though the bickering and slagging off that has been on this thread about a platform that is effectively redundant at the moment, it seems like a horrible place to work. The only good thing I've read about it is that it doesn't go away to the Gulf!!!
It's not about who can or can't do the job, I'm sure that anyone with half a brain cell can eventually grasp the surveillance job, as I'm lead to believe it's not that arduous. But, that said, London Mil the job is in the air and airmanship is always a factor when things go wrong and they often do. The ability to react to situations and emergencys in the air is the priority of everyone. Sentry agitator, to say PET at Cranwell is on par with Wsop training is frankly insulting to all of those who have done the Wsop course or AEOp course. It's entirely different.
I think the point PB was making that there is a host of aircrew trades sat in ground tours, trained and prepared to go flying again. All this taking people out of their ground enviroments , putting them through the system costs money!!!!
I can't believe though the bickering and slagging off that has been on this thread about a platform that is effectively redundant at the moment, it seems like a horrible place to work. The only good thing I've read about it is that it doesn't go away to the Gulf!!!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Traveller, I think you'll find that the PET at Cranwell has been very successful. This along with the wealth of experiance some of the students bring from the ground prepares them extremley well for the OCU.
This course has been needed for a long time and addresses areas that have been missed in the past. This has narrowed the gap between aircrew and "non-aircrew" and the only difference now is flying pay!!!
This course has been needed for a long time and addresses areas that have been missed in the past. This has narrowed the gap between aircrew and "non-aircrew" and the only difference now is flying pay!!!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: England
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sorry, I'm having difficulty understanding what the issue is. Surely this individual has been reccommended for the post. Surely it has been established that it might be a good idea to have a bit more experience on board (perhaps what's needed is a bit more "vanilla" controlling ability and understanding of airspace instead of an FC's take on things - I don't know) Either way, SOMEONE has decided that the extra experience might be a good thing, and I'm sure this guy can be trained to do the job. I notice it's only one chap so far, so perhaps it's a bit of an experiment, who knows. Maybe, just maybe, people already hard at work down the back of an E-3 are frightened that this controller might put a few of them to shame? 