Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Army Door Gunners to be Re-Streamed.

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Army Door Gunners to be Re-Streamed.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 21st Feb 2007, 20:57
  #141 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I didn't realise there were civvy Pumas in the current UK plc Middle Eastern AOO
MINself is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2007, 21:00
  #142 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I didn't realise there were civvy Pumas in the current UK plc Middle Eastern AOO

230 Sqn...........
wg13_dummy is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2007, 21:01
  #143 (permalink)  
wokkameister
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
BORING!

Each branch of the services has their niche. The RN move the booties around to good effect (as long as it's near some water), the AAC are good at making stuff go bang. If people have a problem with the way the SH Force do business, then 30 years downstream is a bit late to start raising the issue.
The RAF have the Puma, Merlin and mighty Wokka to complete the task and so it is up to them to decide their crewing.
In answer to the question do rotary need a crewman to navigate, my answer is definately no. It's a nicety, but I will say it's all very well two stick chimps flying it to point B, but how do they control a triple load pick up or load an internal wmik?

I'm not saying I (as a wokka crewman) am indespensible(I'd rather wave the pilots off for 3 hours IF) but you cannot utilise the aircraft effectively without a crewman. The Yanks, Aussies, Cloggies etc agree. They may call the people different names, but it's still a crewman.
 
Old 21st Feb 2007, 21:04
  #144 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thank you, wokka. At last an honest answer!!

sam. The thread has run it's course so, as usual, the final flings are banter. Sorry if it upsets you. I'll mark my posts with a 'banter' caption in future.
wg13_dummy is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2007, 21:09
  #145 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Dummy - stop throwing stones at us Crabs please.

Why don't you go for a flight at Odiham/Benson and actually see what the RAF crewman bring to the party. You could also go take a look at 657 and see what AAC avn crewmen can do when they are under the command of forward thinking individuals who are not afraid to challenge the DAAvn role model of how crewmen should be employed and invest time and training in order that the crewmen's skill sets are brought closer to those at the other end of the building.

Finally, if the AAC have got it so right, why have DAAvn asked for 6 crewmen to be trained at 55 Sqn for FW ops?? I'm pretty sure that in 2 years time avn crewmen will be trained from ab initio alongside their RN and RAF peers.

SDF
SubdiFuge is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2007, 21:46
  #146 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Dummy - stop throwing stones at us Crabs please.

Why don't you go for a flight at Odiham/Benson and actually see what the RAF crewman bring to the party. You could also go take a look at 657 and see what AAC avn crewmen can do when they are under the command of forward thinking individuals who are not afraid to challenge the DAAvn role model of how crewmen should be employed and invest time and training in order that the crewmen's skill sets are brought closer to those at the other end of the building.

Finally, if the AAC have got it so right, why have DAAvn asked for 6 crewmen to be trained at 55 Sqn for FW ops?? I'm pretty sure that in 2 years time avn crewmen will be trained from ab initio alongside their RN and RAF peers.

SDF

Sub. I for one do not suggest that the AAC has got it right or we are the 'leaders' in this field. As I said in previous posts, we are only just now recognising this as a trade and are trying to work out the best way of using the resource.

It would be nice to see jointry working properly. By this I mean we chuck our guys towards the RAF rearcrew training system (and hopefully your system can look at how we do business).

I totally agree re your remark regarding 657. It would be good if the Corps uses that as a template. Trouble is, you have people who are too busy furnishing their climb up the ladder so feel the need to 'invent' new ideas so they can sign their own name at the bottom of the letter.


SH rearcrew do a sterling job. That there is no doubt.
wg13_dummy is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2007, 21:49
  #147 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Did you say go to Benson or Odiham and go for a fly.... you'd be better off going abroad surely

Forward thinking individuals... good one, they are just giving the customer what he wants, its not rocket science and I doubt you'd have any of the blokes saying they are trying to get their skill set closer to their blue cousins at the other end of the hangar! Its not for here, but the 2 roles are poles apart.
MINself is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2007, 22:03
  #148 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Serious. SH rearcrew do do a sterling job. I don't think I've said on here they haven't or don't. They do sometimes sound like they are trying to justify their existance though. I don't think they need to, to be honest.

As for the RAF looking towards the Army Air corps to see how you do business, why should they when the training system is already set up to produce a competent crewman for the Puma, Merlin or Chinook.
You've not grasped this idea of 'jointry' have you?
wg13_dummy is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2007, 22:10
  #149 (permalink)  
wokkameister
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Sam - WG is playing with you. It's called Banter. Though if your still on the french paraffin budgie you probably don't get much practice.

Tiger, Tiger, Meaow
 
Old 21st Feb 2007, 22:12
  #150 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sams rearcrew in a big Gazelle is he? Explains a lot then.








(72 were sooo much better.....)
wg13_dummy is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2007, 22:12
  #151 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wg,

Not one to bite but are you seriously telling us the ARMY have grasped the jointery principle? 30 plus years of experience tells me for the Army there is only ONE way and that's the Army way..........I mean look at how you are trying to convince us we are wrong with our rearcrew policy whilst your DG plans are the way ahead
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2007, 22:14
  #152 (permalink)  
wokkameister
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Seldom does raise a good point there mate. The AAC does need to invest some money if they want a better end product.
 
Old 21st Feb 2007, 22:19
  #153 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm not suggesting our policy is the way ahead, Seldom.

Jointry is a term based on which side of the fence you sit I suppose. When it comes to the SH force, I suppose the Army does drive it. Maybe because they 'own' it?



The AAC does need to invest some money if they want a better end product

Youre telling me!!
wg13_dummy is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2007, 22:21
  #154 (permalink)  
wokkameister
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
When it comes to the SH force, I suppose the Army does drive it. Maybe because they 'own' it?


I think you'll find thats JHC (with a capital J). Not splitting hairs or anything!
 
Old 21st Feb 2007, 22:24
  #155 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And what use does the RAF have for JHC helicopters?
wg13_dummy is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2007, 22:28
  #156 (permalink)  
wokkameister
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Apart from a few pretty pics on newsletters - None/Zip/Zilch...but then we don't profess to own JHC or AH, or even SH these days.

Sam - Good banter recce. All those years on the self ferrying gate guardian haven't been wasted
 
Old 21st Feb 2007, 22:33
  #157 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I dont conclude that the Army own the SHF but most of the blokes in green at Wilton do.
wg13_dummy is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2007, 22:35
  #158 (permalink)  
wokkameister
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Indeed. WG it is a pleasure fencing with you, but I must rest my weary head. Laters

Sam - I believe highlife boy is waiting for you on the airsteward thread....run along sweetie. You don't want him sweating away there on his own.
 
Old 21st Feb 2007, 22:36
  #159 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And you too, wokka. Stay safe mate.
wg13_dummy is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2007, 07:13
  #160 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK - The SD
Posts: 460
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Indeed it is not rocket science..............................but the course is longer
serf is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.