Army Door Gunners to be Re-Streamed.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somerset
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ratty, not sure I see your point. I think we all of us deal (dealt with) all ranks and sorts of people in our service career. I guess you're right that if the service offers it and people take it up, those of us us that didn't can't really complain. To be honest though matey, I'm really not that bitter lol!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Full of people like WG13 dummy I reckon...........................
Tiger. The retention issue and the wants of Bliar are on different levels unfortunately. The bungee will shortly break I think and Bliar will be confused at why the only people left in the Forces are like those that surrounded Hitler in Berlin at the close of WWII. There are quite a few comparisons to him and his lack of tactical and strategic understanding given by his Generals.
ratty. It would be interesting to see what you actually add with any of your posts on Pprune?
I think a set of binos would be needed though.
BTW where did the teeny weeny airways thread go?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A L/Cpl who may be an excellent rear crew member in every respect may not necessarily have the qualities of a SNCO yet. We still have to think about the rank structure when not in the cab. I don’t mean that in the 'Army blinkered' fashion but more his experience, leadership and management skills that we expect all SNCO's to have.
We are 'specialists' in our respective trade areas and will only be employed on secondary duties when absolutely required. Hence, why the training is generally so much longer (not talking front end here). NCA are giving a comprehensive training course on becoming an NCO and what it can entail. Whilst this does not account for so called 'life experience', when did 4 months at Cranwell or Sandhurst ever supply that to an eighteen year old Officer Cadet and yet they soon go on to lead whole sections or flights?
Quite simply, an Army SNCO has a very different role to an RAF SNCO in many respects. It is not all about who can shout the loudest!!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bungee will shortly break
mmmmmmmmm...............
Ratty: You are a dick who insists on wasting webspace. Get a life.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somerset
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Missing the point Wizard - RAF SNCOs outside of NCA are expected to have every bit as much ability, life experience etc. as their Army compadres and why not? However, you expect a F/O fresh out of training to need a bit of hand holding I guess and I suppose the same is probably true of a sergeant with an eagle between his stripes. Still i don't know 'cos I never worked with sergeant aircrew - all the loadies I worked with down south were F/S or Masters - jeez, that was a long time ago!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wizard, the whole Army 'Soldier First' thing has been misquoted by so many in the past. Mainly by senior army officers. There is a definate misunderstanding to the whole thing.
What it doesn't mean is the ability for anyone, whatever trade or job in the Army to be an infanteer.
What it does mean is everyone in the Army should be able to look after themselves when the going gets tough. They should be able to fire their weapon (meaning they should know how it works and how to keep it working), be fit enough not to become a burden to others around them and be able to keep their kit and themselves in good working order when out of barracks on ops.
In the Army, we just can't afford to be so 'specialised' that the basics go out of the window. We need that extra flexibility that our blokes can function when taken out of thier comfort zone or specific trade. I'm not suggesting that RAF NCA are softy walters who would cry if they were taken out of the aircraft. I know most are quite capable operating outside thier zone. But, I have to say, if put in a position were my cab was downed and I had to revert to old school, I'd rather have an AAC DG/Rearcrew bloke covering my six than an RAF one. Based on the fact he has wont hinder me too much. A sweeping statement I know but my blokes still have the 'soldier first' concept in them. I wont need to wipe his arse.
Credit where credit is due. RAF rear crew do a fine job in that role due not in any small part to the comprehensive training they have recieved.
I dont think an RAF SNCO should have such a different role to an AAC SNCO to be honest. In the JHC/SH role, there shouldn't be that much difference. We work in the same hole.
ratty, yet again, youve proved me right.
What it doesn't mean is the ability for anyone, whatever trade or job in the Army to be an infanteer.
What it does mean is everyone in the Army should be able to look after themselves when the going gets tough. They should be able to fire their weapon (meaning they should know how it works and how to keep it working), be fit enough not to become a burden to others around them and be able to keep their kit and themselves in good working order when out of barracks on ops.
In the Army, we just can't afford to be so 'specialised' that the basics go out of the window. We need that extra flexibility that our blokes can function when taken out of thier comfort zone or specific trade. I'm not suggesting that RAF NCA are softy walters who would cry if they were taken out of the aircraft. I know most are quite capable operating outside thier zone. But, I have to say, if put in a position were my cab was downed and I had to revert to old school, I'd rather have an AAC DG/Rearcrew bloke covering my six than an RAF one. Based on the fact he has wont hinder me too much. A sweeping statement I know but my blokes still have the 'soldier first' concept in them. I wont need to wipe his arse.
Credit where credit is due. RAF rear crew do a fine job in that role due not in any small part to the comprehensive training they have recieved.
I dont think an RAF SNCO should have such a different role to an AAC SNCO to be honest. In the JHC/SH role, there shouldn't be that much difference. We work in the same hole.
ratty, yet again, youve proved me right.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re the Cranwell/Sandhusrt arguement.
We dont allow our young officers a choice until they are at least a snr Capt or Major. They are escorted by a JNCO all the way.
That would quite frankly, be as mad as a mad thing.
We dont allow our young officers a choice until they are at least a snr Capt or Major. They are escorted by a JNCO all the way.
That would quite frankly, be as mad as a mad thing.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[Based on the fact he has wont hinder me too much. A sweeping statement I know but my blokes still have the 'soldier first' concept in them. I wont need to wipe his arse.
Sorry couldn't resist!
Please correct me if I am wrong, but does the AAC still not send a lot of its officers back to their Regiments after a tour or two? Is that not a case of 'Soldier first'?
The specialisation is not at the expense of the basics in the RAF. It is never been part of the RAF skill set to be combat troops (not Infanteers which I accept is specialised) with the exception of the RAF Regiment of course. However, I agree, all military personnel need to be able to look after themselves and those that do find themsleves in the brown stuff generally can. A DG/Rearcrew is undoubtedly more skilled in 'soldiering' but in this day and age the level of training for getting away we all recieve (talking about SH as that is my area) is pretty high. Would you have the same faith in a L/Cpl to organise the evacuation and egress of 40 odd passengers in downed bird environment as you would in letting him get stuck in with the rearguard defence while you legged it? (nothing derogatory implied there)
All I am saying is what you have already hinted at. There are different levels of training for different roles but ultimately we are trying to achieve the same aim!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wg,
I think your crusty old QHI probably really meant if you have f%ck all "informed" to say, then best say f%ck all, and as you appear to have very little grasp of the workings of RAF NCA perhaps you should heed that valuable advice
..............but if I was a betting man I would have my house on you bleathering on
You asked ratty to contribute to this thread and he has with his last post, now without wishing to denigrate the capabilities of your Aircrewman do you seriously wish to tell us that each and everyone of them, bearing in mind our move to the NCA cadre and the supposition that we CAN with training all do each others jobs, can assimilate the skill sets to fill all the NCA posts Ratty lists..................be honest now
I think your crusty old QHI probably really meant if you have f%ck all "informed" to say, then best say f%ck all, and as you appear to have very little grasp of the workings of RAF NCA perhaps you should heed that valuable advice
..............but if I was a betting man I would have my house on you bleathering on You asked ratty to contribute to this thread and he has with his last post, now without wishing to denigrate the capabilities of your Aircrewman do you seriously wish to tell us that each and everyone of them, bearing in mind our move to the NCA cadre and the supposition that we CAN with training all do each others jobs, can assimilate the skill sets to fill all the NCA posts Ratty lists..................be honest now
Tiger,
Having read your response and taking a bit of time to think about it.....one question pops up prompted by your statement......
I cannot believe you mean the shaved apes in the back of the bus "supervise" Nav and Mission planning.
Perhaps you actually mean is included as part of the team and fully briefed by the Aircraft Commander, Troop Commander, and/or pilot and is encouraged to speak up when becoming aware of something that might endanger the aircraft, mission, or crew and passengers.
Yes, our crew chiefs and flight engineers are trained as "mechanics/engineers" and are capable of doing first and second echelon maintenance on the aircraft. The Gunner (if not CE or FE) qualified does grunt work and weapons maintenance. Gunners are allowed to do on the job training and can move up to Crew Chief qualifications.
The concept of having folks trained to crew "any" aircraft doesn't make sense at all. If that were the case.....pilots would be able to swap about without any specialized training.
Are you trying to convince me a crewmember from a Tristar can walk across the ramp and operate a winch without any training then turn right around and rig a Herc for a parachute drop. Well maybe rig the Herc because he will have four years to get it right before the next drop.
I am afraid I will have to accept our crewmembers carry out both engineering and flight crew duties and yours do flight crew duty alone.....which sounds a bit less capable than in our system.
Having read your response and taking a bit of time to think about it.....one question pops up prompted by your statement......
he RAF Crewman is fully integrated into the operation of the aircraft, is expected to oversee nav and mission planning, and is expected to speak up when errors are made, or a more efficient method can be seen.
Perhaps you actually mean is included as part of the team and fully briefed by the Aircraft Commander, Troop Commander, and/or pilot and is encouraged to speak up when becoming aware of something that might endanger the aircraft, mission, or crew and passengers.
Yes, our crew chiefs and flight engineers are trained as "mechanics/engineers" and are capable of doing first and second echelon maintenance on the aircraft. The Gunner (if not CE or FE) qualified does grunt work and weapons maintenance. Gunners are allowed to do on the job training and can move up to Crew Chief qualifications.
The concept of having folks trained to crew "any" aircraft doesn't make sense at all. If that were the case.....pilots would be able to swap about without any specialized training.
Are you trying to convince me a crewmember from a Tristar can walk across the ramp and operate a winch without any training then turn right around and rig a Herc for a parachute drop. Well maybe rig the Herc because he will have four years to get it right before the next drop.
I am afraid I will have to accept our crewmembers carry out both engineering and flight crew duties and yours do flight crew duty alone.....which sounds a bit less capable than in our system.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Totally agree to be honest, Wizard.
Horses for courses as it were.
I have every faith that an AAC rear crew chap would be capable of doing what you suggest, despite only being a L/Cpl. Thankfully we select and recruit blokes who tend to have that certain something. One hopes an advantage should our guys supliment the SH force.
I think at present we have parallel lines. The SH rear crew have qualities and so do ours. It would be nice if we could mix the two without losing the ingredients that make each good.
Our guys are currently trained to do what they need to do and I'm sure, if required, they could work just as well in the SH side of life.
AAC officers or more so pilot trained officers of other cap badges. This is were the crux of the matter comes in. An army officer is still required to be an officer first. Whether that be a tankie, grunt or pilot. Despite the high cost of training a pilot, the officer still needs to jump the hurdles the army sets out in front of him.
The SNCO's are still concidered the 'professional aircrew' because thats what they do for their whole career (if they are lucky) after flying course. An officer is lucky if he gets a full flying tour in before he has to poke off doing such interesting things as SO3 Paper Clip Procurement. If he wants promotion, he still needs to get the ticks in the box at various command levels. That includes an Apache trained officer.
We tend not to send non AAC officers back to thier Corps or Regt (unless they are a complete biff but that sometimes doesn't prevent a full and distinguished career in the AAC ) because it increases the 'outside' knowledge of the Corps and means the cronically short staff officer jobs can be filled.
This is where we sometimes fall down compared to the RAF. Our officers may have a full grounding in all arms doctrine and coffee making up to 3* level but have very little actual aviation experience.
For example, we have just sent a newly qualified officer Aircraft Commander to Iraqistan as a watchkeeper for six months! He's been out of the box for about a year. In an ideal world, he would consolidate his experience as a commander flying. I don't think the army will allow us to change this much to the frustration of the AAC.
ratty. You can shout as much as you like but we will still ignore you.
Horses for courses as it were.
I have every faith that an AAC rear crew chap would be capable of doing what you suggest, despite only being a L/Cpl. Thankfully we select and recruit blokes who tend to have that certain something. One hopes an advantage should our guys supliment the SH force.
I think at present we have parallel lines. The SH rear crew have qualities and so do ours. It would be nice if we could mix the two without losing the ingredients that make each good.
Our guys are currently trained to do what they need to do and I'm sure, if required, they could work just as well in the SH side of life.
AAC officers or more so pilot trained officers of other cap badges. This is were the crux of the matter comes in. An army officer is still required to be an officer first. Whether that be a tankie, grunt or pilot. Despite the high cost of training a pilot, the officer still needs to jump the hurdles the army sets out in front of him.
The SNCO's are still concidered the 'professional aircrew' because thats what they do for their whole career (if they are lucky) after flying course. An officer is lucky if he gets a full flying tour in before he has to poke off doing such interesting things as SO3 Paper Clip Procurement. If he wants promotion, he still needs to get the ticks in the box at various command levels. That includes an Apache trained officer.
We tend not to send non AAC officers back to thier Corps or Regt (unless they are a complete biff but that sometimes doesn't prevent a full and distinguished career in the AAC
) because it increases the 'outside' knowledge of the Corps and means the cronically short staff officer jobs can be filled.This is where we sometimes fall down compared to the RAF. Our officers may have a full grounding in all arms doctrine and coffee making up to 3* level but have very little actual aviation experience.
For example, we have just sent a newly qualified officer Aircraft Commander to Iraqistan as a watchkeeper for six months! He's been out of the box for about a year. In an ideal world, he would consolidate his experience as a commander flying. I don't think the army will allow us to change this much to the frustration of the AAC.
ratty. You can shout as much as you like but we will still ignore you.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannot believe you mean the shaved apes in the back of the bus "supervise" Nav and Mission planning.
Every year there is a Tri service course for Helicopter Tactics Instructors.
The last two years, the top student has been an RAF Non Comissioned Aircrew. Each of these students plans and runs a full CAMAO package.
So, not bad for a 'shaved ape'. I bet half of your jockeys would struggle to achieve that.
I am afraid I will have to accept our crewmembers carry out both engineering and flight crew duties and yours do flight crew duty alone.....which sounds a bit less capable than in our system.
If you had bothered to read some of the earlier posts you would see that we also carry out both engineering and flight crew duties
So, if you are basing your knowledge on what you knew from 'back in the day', best you don't advertise your ignorance and listen to those of us that actually do know what we are talking about.
As it is a Friday night I will put a lot of this down to alcohol fuelled Brit baiting. If so, well done it worked
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAS,
"I cannot believe you mean the shaved apes in the back of the bus "supervise" Nav and Mission planning."
I have often found you stupid and ill informed on this means and am saddened but not surprised to see you portraying your usual dull as dishwater persona
"The concept of having folks trained to crew "any" aircraft doesn't make sense at all"
Who said that
"Are you trying to convince me a crew member from a Tristar can walk across the ramp and operate a winch without any training then turn right around and rig a Herc for a parachute drop."
Who said that
"I am afraid I will have to accept our crew members carry out both engineering and flight crew duties and yours do flight crew duty alone.....which sounds a bit less capable than in our system."
Have you actually read any of the posts from the SH folks
I offer advice to all informed posters in hear to please post in CAPITALS for SAS and the other hard of hearing
"I cannot believe you mean the shaved apes in the back of the bus "supervise" Nav and Mission planning."
I have often found you stupid and ill informed on this means and am saddened but not surprised to see you portraying your usual dull as dishwater persona
"The concept of having folks trained to crew "any" aircraft doesn't make sense at all"
Who said that
"Are you trying to convince me a crew member from a Tristar can walk across the ramp and operate a winch without any training then turn right around and rig a Herc for a parachute drop."
Who said that
"I am afraid I will have to accept our crew members carry out both engineering and flight crew duties and yours do flight crew duty alone.....which sounds a bit less capable than in our system."
Have you actually read any of the posts from the SH folks
I offer advice to all informed posters in hear to please post in CAPITALS for SAS and the other hard of hearing
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seldomfit;
Last time I looked, the AAC didn't operate C130's, Tri* or Nimrods so I dont think there would be any point wasting money training our guys on them.
Unless of course you work in mainbuilding and can see another way of chucking money in the bin for no reason whatsoever?
Can RAF NCA's operate in Lynx or Islander without training?
Wouldn't have thought so because there is no need to.
Are you related to ratty by chance? Maybe your sisters and mothers are the same person?
Grow some swingers and join the convo when you are ready.
Wg,
I think your crusty old QHI probably really meant if you have f%ck all "informed" to say, then best say f%ck all, and as you appear to have very little grasp of the workings of RAF NCA perhaps you should heed that valuable advice ..............but if I was a betting man I would have my house on you bleathering on
You asked ratty to contribute to this thread and he has with his last post, now without wishing to denigrate the capabilities of your Aircrewman do you seriously wish to tell us that each and everyone of them, bearing in mind our move to the NCA cadre and the supposition that we CAN with training all do each others jobs, can assimilate the skill sets to fill all the NCA posts Ratty lists..................be honest now
I think your crusty old QHI probably really meant if you have f%ck all "informed" to say, then best say f%ck all, and as you appear to have very little grasp of the workings of RAF NCA perhaps you should heed that valuable advice ..............but if I was a betting man I would have my house on you bleathering on
You asked ratty to contribute to this thread and he has with his last post, now without wishing to denigrate the capabilities of your Aircrewman do you seriously wish to tell us that each and everyone of them, bearing in mind our move to the NCA cadre and the supposition that we CAN with training all do each others jobs, can assimilate the skill sets to fill all the NCA posts Ratty lists..................be honest now
Unless of course you work in mainbuilding and can see another way of chucking money in the bin for no reason whatsoever?
Can RAF NCA's operate in Lynx or Islander without training?
Wouldn't have thought so because there is no need to.
Are you related to ratty by chance? Maybe your sisters and mothers are the same person?
Grow some swingers and join the convo when you are ready.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lynehamshire
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SASless,
" I cannot believe you mean the shaved apes in the back of the bus "supervise" Nav and Mission planning. "
In general, I would bet that there were more Degrees in the pockets of those "Shaved Apes" than you would find on the ground amounst a large proportion of the commissioned cadre within a great chunk of the military. OK thats by the by, what does that prove, however your assumption that the rearcrewmen are not involved with more far reaching aspects of the flight operations is catagorically incorrect.
The crewmen within the SH fleet ARE involved with the navigation, correct though - not in a supervisory role, they DO understand the mechanical functions of the aircraft, and they ARE expected to at times operate outside their remit using the INITIATIVE expected of a SNCO.
Your comments are unfair, you have obviously been disturbed in some way, wether it be through loyalty or disgust at the shear stupidity of one or two threads. I bear no grudge and I certainly dont rule out the possibility that many of the AAC crewmen would fill the role in a manner that does their servive proud.
WG 13 has provided a balanced view and has even conceded that he holds the RAF crewmen in high regard, with regards to Rattys comments - I dont believe anyone ever mentioned training these guys as Electronics Operators on an AWACS, and it certainly isnt true that any NCA could do any job within NCA, they are still screened for the role that they carry out and trying to fool yourself that it could be any other way is absolute madness.
Guys, if you want to try it out, go to Cranwell, prove that you can do it, and maybe peoplw will notice!
CRPxGood
" I cannot believe you mean the shaved apes in the back of the bus "supervise" Nav and Mission planning. "
In general, I would bet that there were more Degrees in the pockets of those "Shaved Apes" than you would find on the ground amounst a large proportion of the commissioned cadre within a great chunk of the military. OK thats by the by, what does that prove, however your assumption that the rearcrewmen are not involved with more far reaching aspects of the flight operations is catagorically incorrect.
The crewmen within the SH fleet ARE involved with the navigation, correct though - not in a supervisory role, they DO understand the mechanical functions of the aircraft, and they ARE expected to at times operate outside their remit using the INITIATIVE expected of a SNCO.
Your comments are unfair, you have obviously been disturbed in some way, wether it be through loyalty or disgust at the shear stupidity of one or two threads. I bear no grudge and I certainly dont rule out the possibility that many of the AAC crewmen would fill the role in a manner that does their servive proud.
WG 13 has provided a balanced view and has even conceded that he holds the RAF crewmen in high regard, with regards to Rattys comments - I dont believe anyone ever mentioned training these guys as Electronics Operators on an AWACS, and it certainly isnt true that any NCA could do any job within NCA, they are still screened for the role that they carry out and trying to fool yourself that it could be any other way is absolute madness.
Guys, if you want to try it out, go to Cranwell, prove that you can do it, and maybe peoplw will notice!
CRPxGood
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At least me, ratty and Seldomfit are agreed on one thing.
OK, it seems the Army Door Gunners thread has reached a finale.
How about "ratty1 versus wg13_dummy"
I'll take any odds at the moment!!
Clear Right....
I had lunch today with two of my "shaved apes" from Vietnam days. Last time I saw them was in 1970.....they were remarkable people back then....and still are. I have said it before that I feel honored to have served with Men as they are.
I had lunch today with two of my "shaved apes" from Vietnam days. Last time I saw them was in 1970.....they were remarkable people back then....and still are. I have said it before that I feel honored to have served with Men as they are.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SASless
Now you have wound me up. Good skills.
As a "shaved ape", I have been a navigation instructor, tactics instructor, gunnery instructor, EW instructor. I have navigated helicopters hundreds of miles over the sea by DR to and from fixed and moving points. BTW, I have also supervised ab-initio pilots low level navigation, and flown the a/c while the young man in the RHS wallpapers the cockpit. I have also operated radar and all the other bumf that goes with being a Crewman in the British Armed Forces.
The skill set of a Brit Crewman is far advanced from your "shaved ape" that you flew with.
Yes, I have completed training courses prior to aquiring each skill set, but I have had the nous to be able to do that.
2 nations divided by SASless.
Now you have wound me up. Good skills.
As a "shaved ape", I have been a navigation instructor, tactics instructor, gunnery instructor, EW instructor. I have navigated helicopters hundreds of miles over the sea by DR to and from fixed and moving points. BTW, I have also supervised ab-initio pilots low level navigation, and flown the a/c while the young man in the RHS wallpapers the cockpit. I have also operated radar and all the other bumf that goes with being a Crewman in the British Armed Forces.
The skill set of a Brit Crewman is far advanced from your "shaved ape" that you flew with.
Yes, I have completed training courses prior to aquiring each skill set, but I have had the nous to be able to do that.
2 nations divided by SASless.