WSOp's start to walk ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Uk( well sometimes)
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WSOp's start to walk ?
Just lately 3 have walked from ITC and more are wanting out of the training system, have to say mainly linguists although a few wet and dry have had enough. Have OASC got it wrong with their commitment or are we just getting poorer candidates. I understand from AFCO's that the foot flow through the door is down? What’s happening on the Sqn's are people voting with their feet. Heard commissioning is back on the cards except no good for those on PAS !! Any thoughts?
Oh and now ITC are going to train ATC controllers, Never realised the Aircrew training was so good !!!
Oh and now ITC are going to train ATC controllers, Never realised the Aircrew training was so good !!!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Several years ago I was talking with a Nav Stude. He had been commissioned in the Navy (or about to be) but listening to the Observers at Yeovilton and the crash rate he decided the RN was not for him.
He joined the 'safer' RAF.
I was gobsmacked.
He joined the 'safer' RAF.
I was gobsmacked.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: England
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rude-C,
It may not be a question of commitment or poorer candidates, but perhaps a growing realisation of what they might be getting themselves into given the present Nimrod climate? And as you suggest, these WSOps (wet, dry & lingo) would all be destined for Nimrod.
As for commisioning, why not allow PAS WSOps and increase thier PAS ceiling to from 20 to 28? After all, those selected for PAS are supposed to be high-calibre experienced aircrew and would therefore offer good commisioning potential. On the subject of PAS, as the scheme was designed to decouple rank from pay, why can't NCA progress beyond level 20? In fact, as a good retention measure, the PAS celings should be removed so that everyone is able reach the top level (35) - sorry for the slight thread creep but the potential of a £15,000 pay rise over 15 years would be quite nice, not to mention the benefits of retiring on AFPS05 at age 54+364 days and pissing off every single non-aircrew officer up to level 9 Wg Cdrs.
It may not be a question of commitment or poorer candidates, but perhaps a growing realisation of what they might be getting themselves into given the present Nimrod climate? And as you suggest, these WSOps (wet, dry & lingo) would all be destined for Nimrod.
As for commisioning, why not allow PAS WSOps and increase thier PAS ceiling to from 20 to 28? After all, those selected for PAS are supposed to be high-calibre experienced aircrew and would therefore offer good commisioning potential. On the subject of PAS, as the scheme was designed to decouple rank from pay, why can't NCA progress beyond level 20? In fact, as a good retention measure, the PAS celings should be removed so that everyone is able reach the top level (35) - sorry for the slight thread creep but the potential of a £15,000 pay rise over 15 years would be quite nice, not to mention the benefits of retiring on AFPS05 at age 54+364 days and pissing off every single non-aircrew officer up to level 9 Wg Cdrs.
Last edited by OHP 15M; 21st Nov 2007 at 23:33. Reason: Addition
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
AIDU, not WSOps per ser but everything to do with testing for courage, or intelligence, at OASC.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: england
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely there is no problem with recruitment or retention or manning in our trade. Otherwise our 17.5 year retention bonus would still be getting paid, instead of being binned at the first oppurtunity after only 3 years!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: middleofnowhere
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The basic airman aircrew training course is designed to weed out the wheat from the chaff. There is no way to subject a recruit to the pace and level of dedication required to pass the course, without putting on it.
The standard of recruits we get through to the generic phase, the trade training bit, are generally very high.
The only way we could stop certain people leaving is to make the course even more fluffy, which will affect the standard of the end product.
I suppose we could turn the whole process into an attendance course like the officers get................?
Touch paper lit, back 10, 8, 6 ...................
The standard of recruits we get through to the generic phase, the trade training bit, are generally very high.
The only way we could stop certain people leaving is to make the course even more fluffy, which will affect the standard of the end product.
I suppose we could turn the whole process into an attendance course like the officers get................?
Touch paper lit, back 10, 8, 6 ...................
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Uk( well sometimes)
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RTCB- Wrote ....
That fine upstanding Crewman can't any more 'Upstand' , he had a 4 hour privately funded op to reconstruct his ankle and got downgraded so he couldnt go back !! As for short tour , I believe the tour length is 2-3 yrs and he hasnt been at Cranwell that long. Roger get yer facts right mate or STFU.
Give him a ring Im sure he'll put you straight on the matter .
Shawtrace...
I agree with you ... maybe we should make it an easier course .... but there again its not an Aircrew Course anymore it's about training SNCO's .... NOT!!!!!!...... NCAITC send some of their Failures to IOT......wonder why ?
There will always be people who realise that "it" is not for them. There used to be a bloke on Chinooks - gobby git - who didn't fancy going away to Afghanistan or Iraq before it. So he engineered a posting to Cranwell. When it was discussed about posting him back to SH, he then claimed that he had a bad leg or something, even getting himself a minor operation, and therefore managing to extend in post. Shame really. LMF?
Give him a ring Im sure he'll put you straight on the matter .
Shawtrace...
I suppose we could turn the whole process into an attendance course like the officers get................?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: middleofnowhere
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That fine upstanding Crewman can't any more 'Upstand' , he had a 4 hour privately funded op to reconstruct his ankle and got downgraded so he couldnt go back !! As for short tour , I believe the tour length is 2-3 yrs and he hasnt been at Cranwell that long
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
In his conclusion to his 6 monthly report to the Boss CAS has said that recruiting and retention is very worrying and that the AFB are focussing particularly on this area.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England formerly Great Britain
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
- The RAF (& Navy) need additional Helicopter Crewman on the frontline yesterday: FACT
- There are barely enough WSOp going through the training pipeline to replace the sickies and discharges be it through time, PVR, NGR: FACT
- Helicopter Crewmen will never be able to restream unless long term sick:FACT This never was a realistic option, and the concept is brainless.
- So desperate are they that they have accepted back into a flying role ex ALM > GD/OpsSup > Commisioned Crewman: FACT That did shedloads for the morale of young thrusters who remained dedicated to the ALM trade but were denied commisioning opportunities.
- It is crisis management of the highest order, and so desperateis it, that certain key members of the management food chain believe that a lessor trained individual (Door Gunner?) is acceptable to achieve a numbers on seats.
- Therefore potential Helicopter Crewmen should be recruited as Helicopter Crewmen; rather then generic WSOp, and fully SH trained in the shortest realistic time to meet OCF intakes.
- The SAR bit should be done at the earliest opportunity once Combat Ready, and whilst highly desirable, remains far from essential, especially in the short term. Oops, forgot, that is what they used to do before the sly AEOp recruitment package came into being. What a shambles.
- There should not be a single WSOp on a holding tour/det anywhere on the planet.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The generic course is a nasty gamble end of story. The officer at the top (who probably got an OBE for his efforts) must have realized recruits would walk. This is wasting so much potential!! I'd say most join with a set intention of where they want to end up.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: As close to beer as humanly possible
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd say most join with a set intention of where they want to end up.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Uk( well sometimes)
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Admin Guru-
So what happens if they fail any part of the training?.... just bin em to IOT ...
I agree the generic system has its flaws ... in principle it's good training for NCA however, it does need a revamp !!!
If SH needs so many crewman why are they still streaming Accustic and why hasnt Shawbury shortened all courses to teach what is needed?
Maybe because of contracts, lack of staff ,ac and a system that cant cope with any more trainee's? discuss
So what happens if they fail any part of the training?.... just bin em to IOT ...
I agree the generic system has its flaws ... in principle it's good training for NCA however, it does need a revamp !!!
If SH needs so many crewman why are they still streaming Accustic and why hasnt Shawbury shortened all courses to teach what is needed?
Maybe because of contracts, lack of staff ,ac and a system that cant cope with any more trainee's? discuss
Last edited by Rude C'man; 23rd Nov 2007 at 10:32.