Gaining An R.A.F Pilots Brevet In WW II
Guest
Posts: n/a
Wunderbar !
All,
Here we've got a perfect example of our "Crewroom in Cyberspace" working
exactly as it should, with the tales bouncing off from one to another.
You can almost smell the fug of cigarette smoke, see the battered old thrown-out easy chairs, and hear the rain drumming on the Nissen roof, can't you ?
When the last of us "Gainers of a RAF Pilot's Brevet in WWII" has "shuffled off this mortal coil", perhaps our Moderators (bless their little cotton socks), who by their forebearance have allowed Cliff's (RIP) Thread of long ago to grow into the best thing on PPruNe, may allow it to run on renamed as above when its original title has (literally) expired.
Danny.
Here we've got a perfect example of our "Crewroom in Cyberspace" working
exactly as it should, with the tales bouncing off from one to another.
You can almost smell the fug of cigarette smoke, see the battered old thrown-out easy chairs, and hear the rain drumming on the Nissen roof, can't you ?
When the last of us "Gainers of a RAF Pilot's Brevet in WWII" has "shuffled off this mortal coil", perhaps our Moderators (bless their little cotton socks), who by their forebearance have allowed Cliff's (RIP) Thread of long ago to grow into the best thing on PPruNe, may allow it to run on renamed as above when its original title has (literally) expired.
Danny.
Last edited by Danny42C; 24th Sep 2014 at 20:52. Reason: Spelling
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: humzaland
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Danny
It's a long time ago now but luckily my purloined PNs tell me that the EMERG. BOMBS JETTISON (proper name) did open the doors and jettison all the bombs - did anyone ever have cause to use it? 25 pounders were on their own carrier though, and couldn't be jettisoned. They were armed on the ground and could, and did from time to time, hang up because they had frozen on to the crutches (is that the right term?), and then drop on to the doors when the ice melted.
And a general enquiry: does 9 still have the bogseat from the Prussian Queen? (At the time there was also a completed wartime Authorisation Book in the B Flight Office. Is it still there?)
It's a long time ago now but luckily my purloined PNs tell me that the EMERG. BOMBS JETTISON (proper name) did open the doors and jettison all the bombs - did anyone ever have cause to use it? 25 pounders were on their own carrier though, and couldn't be jettisoned. They were armed on the ground and could, and did from time to time, hang up because they had frozen on to the crutches (is that the right term?), and then drop on to the doors when the ice melted.
And a general enquiry: does 9 still have the bogseat from the Prussian Queen? (At the time there was also a completed wartime Authorisation Book in the B Flight Office. Is it still there?)
Guest
Posts: n/a
binbrook,
So it could be done, after all ! Again, YLSNED ! Would have been very useful for me the day when I was going in to the jungle from a thousand feet after engine failure with 1500 lb on board.
Although I reduced the aircraft to a pile of scrap, the bombs didn't go off, and the fuel didn't go up.
So it could be done, after all ! Again, YLSNED ! Would have been very useful for me the day when I was going in to the jungle from a thousand feet after engine failure with 1500 lb on board.
Although I reduced the aircraft to a pile of scrap, the bombs didn't go off, and the fuel didn't go up.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Flying Training Failure Rates in the Arnold Schools.
Hempy,
I haven't read any of Dr Quinn's books, but thought they were mostly about the BFTS, and we've had several chaps on Thread (Cliff for a start) who were there and know all about it, whereas I was an Arnold boy and know little of them apart from the fact that they existed.
The Great Divide (in loss rates) seems to have occurred between (Arnold) 42D and 42E. I'd guess that 42D started around 7th October '41. It's interesting that BFTS 42K had 30 hours Grading School in UK first, but (assuming that the BFTS Courses ran side by side with the Arnold - and I think they both started about the same time in the summer of '41), 42K would start some 40 weeks later and so cannot have been a factor in the Arnold case.
At Carlstrom in 42C, we certainly had a lot "washed out" in the first week or two (40% would not surprise me) but we all thought that was quite normal (I myself lost three of my four room-mates). Our Instructors did not seem to find it in any way unusual. Does anybody know the "scrub rates" in UK EFTS at the time ?
Danny.
I haven't read any of Dr Quinn's books, but thought they were mostly about the BFTS, and we've had several chaps on Thread (Cliff for a start) who were there and know all about it, whereas I was an Arnold boy and know little of them apart from the fact that they existed.
The Great Divide (in loss rates) seems to have occurred between (Arnold) 42D and 42E. I'd guess that 42D started around 7th October '41. It's interesting that BFTS 42K had 30 hours Grading School in UK first, but (assuming that the BFTS Courses ran side by side with the Arnold - and I think they both started about the same time in the summer of '41), 42K would start some 40 weeks later and so cannot have been a factor in the Arnold case.
At Carlstrom in 42C, we certainly had a lot "washed out" in the first week or two (40% would not surprise me) but we all thought that was quite normal (I myself lost three of my four room-mates). Our Instructors did not seem to find it in any way unusual. Does anybody know the "scrub rates" in UK EFTS at the time ?
Danny.
Is this it?
Danny
BFTS washout rate approx 23%
Arnold Plan schools washout rate approx 45%
Back to Will Largent's "RAF Wings over Florida". Chapter 1. Carlstrom Field, Arcadia, Florida, page 18.
"It was apparent early on that something had to be done to stop the flow of washouts in the Arnold schools. Late in 1941, Arnold cadets were given a four-week 'familiarization' session at a U.S. Army air base before going into primary flight training. The program (sic) was designed to help them adjust to the new culture, climate, military discipline, and different foods".
The Arnold Plan itself was the real problem run under rigid U.S.A.A.C. regulations.
"The Arnold Plan cadet was sent from one training post to the next (primary to basic to advanced) and never had more than ten weeks in one place before shipping out to another. This was in direct contrast to the British cadet in a BFTS program (sic) taking primary through advanced training in the same place. Stationed at one base for six months or more a cadet had plenty of time to learn the territory, make friends, and develop a feeling of security -- all important to English boys who had never traveled far from their homeland".
Then, (we've been here before haven't we!) there was the 'Hazing'.
"Tired of being ground down by the often silly, ever juvenile, occasionally sadistic, and sometimes plain stupid hazing incidents, RAF cadets took action, sometimes convincing base commanders to reduce, or, in some cases end the old 'tradition'".
Ian BB
BFTS washout rate approx 23%
Arnold Plan schools washout rate approx 45%
Back to Will Largent's "RAF Wings over Florida". Chapter 1. Carlstrom Field, Arcadia, Florida, page 18.
"It was apparent early on that something had to be done to stop the flow of washouts in the Arnold schools. Late in 1941, Arnold cadets were given a four-week 'familiarization' session at a U.S. Army air base before going into primary flight training. The program (sic) was designed to help them adjust to the new culture, climate, military discipline, and different foods".
The Arnold Plan itself was the real problem run under rigid U.S.A.A.C. regulations.
"The Arnold Plan cadet was sent from one training post to the next (primary to basic to advanced) and never had more than ten weeks in one place before shipping out to another. This was in direct contrast to the British cadet in a BFTS program (sic) taking primary through advanced training in the same place. Stationed at one base for six months or more a cadet had plenty of time to learn the territory, make friends, and develop a feeling of security -- all important to English boys who had never traveled far from their homeland".
Then, (we've been here before haven't we!) there was the 'Hazing'.
"Tired of being ground down by the often silly, ever juvenile, occasionally sadistic, and sometimes plain stupid hazing incidents, RAF cadets took action, sometimes convincing base commanders to reduce, or, in some cases end the old 'tradition'".
Ian BB
Guest
Posts: n/a
"Washouts" in the Arnold Scheme.
Ian BB,
All true - but only "up to a point, Lord Copper !"
The "hazing" problem could only exist in one "interface" between the last American "Upperclass" Course (No.?) and the first RAF "Lowerclass" (42A). This (at Carlstrom) led to a riot of which the details seem to have been hushed up - at least, I could never find any (supposedly the Upperclass came off worst from the ensuing combat).
When the RAF in turn became the "Upperclass"of 42A, they would be followed by a RAF "Lowerclass" (42B) and peace reigned thereafter (as both classes combined, in true British style, to confront the real enemy - the "Management").
In truth, they weren't too bad. The "bull" was no worse than in a British FTS - just different, and if you didn't try to "buck" the system, but just went along with it (when in Rome...), life was comfortable enough (and much more luxurious, better fed and housed than on a UK Station). Of course, there was always the usual malcontent: they got rid of him in short order.
The contrast between the Arnold system (two months at each of three different Schools dotted round the States) and the BFTS (all six months in one spot) was really no problem. It might well have made your social life (if any) more difficult, but then that's not what you're there for, is it ?
Btw, "program" is perfectly correct American spelling. "..,and to develop a feeling of security..". You're in a war, for pity's sake ! There is no "security" !
The real tragedy was the 3,392 "washouts". A few (number unknown) might have had a second chance in Canada. But it is hard to resist the suspicion that that the RAF lost many potential pilots unnecessarily (that they badly needed at that stage). As a matter of interest, and in very rough figures, the total output from the Arnold plus BFTS just about balanced the 8,000 odd pilots killed in our Bomber Command campaign (taking no account of the POWs).
And we still haven't solved the mystery of the dramatic fall in the loss rates at the 42D - 42E point in the Arnold schools (and maybe now never will).
Danny.
All true - but only "up to a point, Lord Copper !"
The "hazing" problem could only exist in one "interface" between the last American "Upperclass" Course (No.?) and the first RAF "Lowerclass" (42A). This (at Carlstrom) led to a riot of which the details seem to have been hushed up - at least, I could never find any (supposedly the Upperclass came off worst from the ensuing combat).
When the RAF in turn became the "Upperclass"of 42A, they would be followed by a RAF "Lowerclass" (42B) and peace reigned thereafter (as both classes combined, in true British style, to confront the real enemy - the "Management").
In truth, they weren't too bad. The "bull" was no worse than in a British FTS - just different, and if you didn't try to "buck" the system, but just went along with it (when in Rome...), life was comfortable enough (and much more luxurious, better fed and housed than on a UK Station). Of course, there was always the usual malcontent: they got rid of him in short order.
The contrast between the Arnold system (two months at each of three different Schools dotted round the States) and the BFTS (all six months in one spot) was really no problem. It might well have made your social life (if any) more difficult, but then that's not what you're there for, is it ?
Btw, "program" is perfectly correct American spelling. "..,and to develop a feeling of security..". You're in a war, for pity's sake ! There is no "security" !
The real tragedy was the 3,392 "washouts". A few (number unknown) might have had a second chance in Canada. But it is hard to resist the suspicion that that the RAF lost many potential pilots unnecessarily (that they badly needed at that stage). As a matter of interest, and in very rough figures, the total output from the Arnold plus BFTS just about balanced the 8,000 odd pilots killed in our Bomber Command campaign (taking no account of the POWs).
And we still haven't solved the mystery of the dramatic fall in the loss rates at the 42D - 42E point in the Arnold schools (and maybe now never will).
Danny.
I daresay the statistics have already been given on washouts. It would be interesting to know what the cadets were washed out for, lack of aptitude or something else? Jack Currie for example was washed out of Primary for low flying until his instructor appealed to the C.O. (who had caught him) He went on to complete a tour with Bomber Command with a DFC. Maybe the Americans didn’t realise there was a war on? 
Just a thought.
Danny
So you don't think that :
Late in 1941, Arnold cadets were given a four-week 'familiarization' session at a U.S. Army air base before going into primary flight training. The program (sic) was designed to help them adjust to the new culture, climate, military discipline, and different foods".
had anything to do with
the dramatic fall in the loss rates at the 42D - 42E point in the Arnold schools
Oh well, just a thought
Ian BB
So you don't think that :
Late in 1941, Arnold cadets were given a four-week 'familiarization' session at a U.S. Army air base before going into primary flight training. The program (sic) was designed to help them adjust to the new culture, climate, military discipline, and different foods".
had anything to do with
the dramatic fall in the loss rates at the 42D - 42E point in the Arnold schools
Oh well, just a thought
Ian BB
Guest
Posts: n/a
Learning the Hard Way.
blind pew,
And there was me, thinking that it was only the RAF who cocked it up on a grand scale ! I had implicit trust in our civil airlines, believing that all the maintenance was perfect and that the crews were truly the Übermensch of whom you speak.
And now you tell me: " ..his flat mate had selected Land Flap instead of Flap Up at the cutback point..." (not really the ideal thing in the circumstances). I think I'll "let the Train take the Strain" from now on (only metaphorically, as I am unlikely to venture very far nowadays). In any case, I always said to myself "If I'm to get killed flying, I'd much prefer it to be my own fault rather than that of some wild youth who should never have been on a Flight Deck in the first place".
I like the sound of "corporate amnesia" (must remember that !). There is plenty of it about. Harks back to the old definition of a Corporation: ("That which has no body to be kicked and no soul to be damned").
And I know all too well the folly of assuming "the gauge" (or whatever) "must be faulty - everything's all right, really". Nearly cost me my life one day (you should always assume the worst, and act accordingly !)
Danny.
And there was me, thinking that it was only the RAF who cocked it up on a grand scale ! I had implicit trust in our civil airlines, believing that all the maintenance was perfect and that the crews were truly the Übermensch of whom you speak.
And now you tell me: " ..his flat mate had selected Land Flap instead of Flap Up at the cutback point..." (not really the ideal thing in the circumstances). I think I'll "let the Train take the Strain" from now on (only metaphorically, as I am unlikely to venture very far nowadays). In any case, I always said to myself "If I'm to get killed flying, I'd much prefer it to be my own fault rather than that of some wild youth who should never have been on a Flight Deck in the first place".
I like the sound of "corporate amnesia" (must remember that !). There is plenty of it about. Harks back to the old definition of a Corporation: ("That which has no body to be kicked and no soul to be damned").
And I know all too well the folly of assuming "the gauge" (or whatever) "must be faulty - everything's all right, really". Nearly cost me my life one day (you should always assume the worst, and act accordingly !)
Danny.
Last edited by Danny42C; 26th Sep 2014 at 15:32. Reason: Typo.
Danny:-
Danny, if the Military Forum ran a thread called
I suspect that, unlike with this one, they would be forever having to intervene. It could be argued that a whole Forum exists anyway at
Jet Blast - PPRuNe Forums
or indeed in the shape of the entire Military Forum itself. No, with due respect, you and your WW2 colleagues are the glue that binds this thread together. I doubt very much if a thread entitled "Gaining an RAF Pilot's Brevet in the Cold War" would get past page 1, unless it be filled by those of more junior years posting what is quaintly termed 'banter'.
So, back to the crewroom. I see that there is at last a battered chair free and a tea stained copy of Tee Emm to thumb through, so I'll just settle down with a cuppa and join in.
Danny, I'm sure that the basic problem with the Arnold scheme at the start was exactly as you surmise, ie not the students but the USAAC. It wasn't yet fully at war and wasn't going to change its habits for a bunch of Brits. The same syndrome existed in the USN which didn't do convoy, the US Army which didn't fear Rommel, and indeed the USAAC which could defend itself by day over the Reich. All very expensive lessons to learn. Being washed out stateside was perhaps a hard outcome but pales into insignificance in comparison perhaps.
blind pew, interesting stuff re BEA. It rather chimes with my admittedly biased outlook. I remember just before I PVR'd in '73 a friend of mine left to join BOAC. He was elated and didn't appreciate my put down that I wouldn't want to leave the RAF only to do yet more government work, thank you. As it was I got a job with Dan-Air until we were duly swallowed up by BA in '92. It was truly an eye-opener.
Professionally we had to learn the 'monitored approach', a different Flight System, etc, all fair enough for, "he who pays the piper...". The eye-opener was the labyrinthine bureaucracy of the company that occupied our one administrator that came with us 24/7, as well as low morale - both ours and seemingly the rest of BA. Ours was down to 'survivor syndrome' whereas we had kept our jobs (in a BA subsidiary BAEOG, paid at DA -10%) while the majority had lost theirs, being on the wrong fleet and/or the wrong base. Theirs seemed to be simply the BA status quo.
We were of course well monitored by the BA training establishment, and I remember one such captain down from LHR to route check us out of LGW. At the end of the day he had little to comment on other than to say, "your cabin crew, they're very friendly, aren't they?". I should hasten to add that this was said in an utterly sincere way lest anyone imagine some double entendre! It left us wondering what his normal experiences were to make such a comment...
Oh, for the record, at an all fleets training meeting at LHR, the worry was raised of BA taking on "all these ex charter pilots". The response was not to worry, as they had now all completed their BA "harmonisation" training with an average rating of a BA High Average!
perhaps our Moderators (bless their little cotton socks), who by their forebearance have allowed Cliff's (RIP) Thread of long ago to grow into the best thing on PPRuNe, may allow it to run on renamed as above when its original title has (literally) expired.
Crewroom in Cyberspace
Jet Blast - PPRuNe Forums
or indeed in the shape of the entire Military Forum itself. No, with due respect, you and your WW2 colleagues are the glue that binds this thread together. I doubt very much if a thread entitled "Gaining an RAF Pilot's Brevet in the Cold War" would get past page 1, unless it be filled by those of more junior years posting what is quaintly termed 'banter'.
So, back to the crewroom. I see that there is at last a battered chair free and a tea stained copy of Tee Emm to thumb through, so I'll just settle down with a cuppa and join in.
Danny, I'm sure that the basic problem with the Arnold scheme at the start was exactly as you surmise, ie not the students but the USAAC. It wasn't yet fully at war and wasn't going to change its habits for a bunch of Brits. The same syndrome existed in the USN which didn't do convoy, the US Army which didn't fear Rommel, and indeed the USAAC which could defend itself by day over the Reich. All very expensive lessons to learn. Being washed out stateside was perhaps a hard outcome but pales into insignificance in comparison perhaps.
blind pew, interesting stuff re BEA. It rather chimes with my admittedly biased outlook. I remember just before I PVR'd in '73 a friend of mine left to join BOAC. He was elated and didn't appreciate my put down that I wouldn't want to leave the RAF only to do yet more government work, thank you. As it was I got a job with Dan-Air until we were duly swallowed up by BA in '92. It was truly an eye-opener.
Professionally we had to learn the 'monitored approach', a different Flight System, etc, all fair enough for, "he who pays the piper...". The eye-opener was the labyrinthine bureaucracy of the company that occupied our one administrator that came with us 24/7, as well as low morale - both ours and seemingly the rest of BA. Ours was down to 'survivor syndrome' whereas we had kept our jobs (in a BA subsidiary BAEOG, paid at DA -10%) while the majority had lost theirs, being on the wrong fleet and/or the wrong base. Theirs seemed to be simply the BA status quo.
We were of course well monitored by the BA training establishment, and I remember one such captain down from LHR to route check us out of LGW. At the end of the day he had little to comment on other than to say, "your cabin crew, they're very friendly, aren't they?". I should hasten to add that this was said in an utterly sincere way lest anyone imagine some double entendre! It left us wondering what his normal experiences were to make such a comment...
Oh, for the record, at an all fleets training meeting at LHR, the worry was raised of BA taking on "all these ex charter pilots". The response was not to worry, as they had now all completed their BA "harmonisation" training with an average rating of a BA High Average!
Danny I must confess that I plagiarised the term from one of the inquiries into Murdoch but it sums up some of the testimonies at the public inquiry.
Chugalug...you were one of the lucky ones as was one of my Hamble course ex Court Line...whereas another albeit much senior wasn't.
The friendly cabin crew comment came about as there were certain "Gentlemen" and I use the term in the broadest sense - who admonished me for using "please and thank-you" "as the cabin staff are here to serve you..."
There is a very true story about a mega God on the European Tristar who rung down to the underfloor galley on a London to Paris in the days when passengers would get a three course meal whilst the flight crew would try and set a record flight time.
His lordship phoned down his order - the term "pig ignorant" comes to mind - whereby the steward asks - very poshly - "do you know with whom you are speaking sir?" ...."no...well eff off then".
At Paris the whole crew were ordered off the aircraft and lined up...his nibs never found the culprit who didn't pay for a drink for months ;-)
BOAC on minis - VC10s and 707s - was the complete opposite as was Swissair where 90% of the time the flight deck paid for all of the drinks for the cabin crew.
I never understood the mentality as we had a common goal - serve the passengers and have fun whilst we did it.
Chugalug...you were one of the lucky ones as was one of my Hamble course ex Court Line...whereas another albeit much senior wasn't.
The friendly cabin crew comment came about as there were certain "Gentlemen" and I use the term in the broadest sense - who admonished me for using "please and thank-you" "as the cabin staff are here to serve you..."
There is a very true story about a mega God on the European Tristar who rung down to the underfloor galley on a London to Paris in the days when passengers would get a three course meal whilst the flight crew would try and set a record flight time.
His lordship phoned down his order - the term "pig ignorant" comes to mind - whereby the steward asks - very poshly - "do you know with whom you are speaking sir?" ...."no...well eff off then".
At Paris the whole crew were ordered off the aircraft and lined up...his nibs never found the culprit who didn't pay for a drink for months ;-)
BOAC on minis - VC10s and 707s - was the complete opposite as was Swissair where 90% of the time the flight deck paid for all of the drinks for the cabin crew.
I never understood the mentality as we had a common goal - serve the passengers and have fun whilst we did it.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Wastages in the Arnold Scheme ( the plot thickens).
Ian BB,
Frankly Ian, no. That it may have said some bearing, I readily acknowledge. But the unspoken message here is: "These excessive losses were due to the RAF "Kay-dets" inability to assimilate the new culture, climate, military discipline, and different foods".
That is simply untrue (in my experience in Carlstrom, and I do not think the succeeding RAF intakes were any different fom ours). All our "washouts" from 42C were flying-related, either for not being fit for solo at the 10 hr mark, or for subsequent gross breaches of flying discipline. AFAIK, not a single one of our 40% "wastages" was due to a ground disciplinary offence. That cock simply will not fight.
Note that the month's "familiarisation" included no actual flying (the paltry total of 9 failures for the entire time is evidence of that - and it would be very hard to fail a Course that consisted of simply being lectured at for a month and (AFAIK) had no exam at the end.
They would arrive at Primary with zero hours (perhaps one in a thousand had a little previous flying experience): most of us had never been off the ground.
There is something else at work here. I suspect "creative accounting" (cooking the books !) And if there was this dramatic improvement from 42D onward, how do you account for the overall wastage of 3,392 (42 %) of the entire entry ? (this was higher than 42C's loss rate ! we had insignificant losses after Primary - but a few killed).
Danny.
Frankly Ian, no. That it may have said some bearing, I readily acknowledge. But the unspoken message here is: "These excessive losses were due to the RAF "Kay-dets" inability to assimilate the new culture, climate, military discipline, and different foods".
That is simply untrue (in my experience in Carlstrom, and I do not think the succeeding RAF intakes were any different fom ours). All our "washouts" from 42C were flying-related, either for not being fit for solo at the 10 hr mark, or for subsequent gross breaches of flying discipline. AFAIK, not a single one of our 40% "wastages" was due to a ground disciplinary offence. That cock simply will not fight.
Note that the month's "familiarisation" included no actual flying (the paltry total of 9 failures for the entire time is evidence of that - and it would be very hard to fail a Course that consisted of simply being lectured at for a month and (AFAIK) had no exam at the end.
They would arrive at Primary with zero hours (perhaps one in a thousand had a little previous flying experience): most of us had never been off the ground.
There is something else at work here. I suspect "creative accounting" (cooking the books !) And if there was this dramatic improvement from 42D onward, how do you account for the overall wastage of 3,392 (42 %) of the entire entry ? (this was higher than 42C's loss rate ! we had insignificant losses after Primary - but a few killed).
Danny.
Last edited by Danny42C; 25th Sep 2014 at 17:36. Reason: Spacing.
History - can we ever know the truth?
Danny
Thank for your last
That is simply untrue (in my experience in Carlstrom, and I do not think the succeeding RAF intakes were any different fom ours). All our "washouts" from 42C were flying-related, either for not being fit for solo at the 10 hr mark, or for subsequent gross breaches of flying discipline. AFAIK, not a single one of our 40% "wastages" was due to a ground disciplinary offence. That cock simply will not fight.
Since I first had the temerity to intrude on this fascinating thread (five months ago, page 276) I made the point that I was not there, and I can only research what has been written about the training programs (non sic)
that you and my late father experienced in sunny Florida. Your statement, above, is not what I read from my researches. Danny, I am absolutely in no way doubting your word (as an ex-officer and I am sure, still a gentleman) about your own experiences, but, I have the impression that you are tougher than most of your peers (after all you are one of the last men standing) and that the reasons for the elimination of many of your fellows may not have been obvious to you at the time, or indeed now, when you read the recorded interviews with others who were also there
With respect
Ian BB
Thank for your last
That is simply untrue (in my experience in Carlstrom, and I do not think the succeeding RAF intakes were any different fom ours). All our "washouts" from 42C were flying-related, either for not being fit for solo at the 10 hr mark, or for subsequent gross breaches of flying discipline. AFAIK, not a single one of our 40% "wastages" was due to a ground disciplinary offence. That cock simply will not fight.
Since I first had the temerity to intrude on this fascinating thread (five months ago, page 276) I made the point that I was not there, and I can only research what has been written about the training programs (non sic)
that you and my late father experienced in sunny Florida. Your statement, above, is not what I read from my researches. Danny, I am absolutely in no way doubting your word (as an ex-officer and I am sure, still a gentleman) about your own experiences, but, I have the impression that you are tougher than most of your peers (after all you are one of the last men standing) and that the reasons for the elimination of many of your fellows may not have been obvious to you at the time, or indeed now, when you read the recorded interviews with others who were also there
With respect
Ian BB
My father was trained in Pensacola with the US Navy. He was fairly old, thirty, but he was an ex-brat. The fact that he was married and had two children was also unusual. My mothers only comment about his time in the States was that he was two left feet on the dance floor before he went but was like Fred Astair when he came back.
He did a lot of his flying on seaplanes. Possibly he was being streamed for Sunderlands in Coastal. He ended up in Coastal but on Met Halifaxs.
He did a lot of his flying on seaplanes. Possibly he was being streamed for Sunderlands in Coastal. He ended up in Coastal but on Met Halifaxs.
Guest
Posts: n/a
"What's in a name - a Rose by any other name would smell as sweet"
Chugalug,
Sadly, you're probably right. Yet we've got such a good thing going here, it would be such a shame if some way to continue its spirit could not be found after the last of us depart (we've not heard much of harrym recently - and I can't last for ever). Hopefully, we've still got chaps like Ian BB and others, who have access to their grand/father's log books and writings (in some cases, the old chap's still alive and able to contribute) and so keep the flag flying - but only for a limited time.
I suppose the real value of us old fossils is that we were there and can tell it exactly how it was (for I'm afraid the revisionist historians hover like vultures all the time). A good example is the Post to Ian BB about "Arnold" which I've just put in: it would seem that his source has implied (probably in all good faith) an explanation of the wastage scandal which simply doesn't hold water. But it fits so nicely that it would certainly pass as truth unless some old codger like me puts his oar in and says: "Hang on, I was there, it wasn't like that at all".
The reaction to "Pearl Harbor" was a story in itself. Their prized Pacific Fleet (or a large part of it) was on the bottom at "Battleship Row" (it was only by the Grace of God that their big Fleet Carriers were at sea, but the Japs didn't know that, or they might have lost some or all of them as well); they were at war with Japan whether they liked it or not; then Hitler seized his chance and declared War on them, too (that really put the cap on it !)
Their only solace was that now they had us as their Gallant Ally - but at that stage of the War, we were hard put to it trying to survive ourselves, never mind helping anybody else !
Danny.
Sadly, you're probably right. Yet we've got such a good thing going here, it would be such a shame if some way to continue its spirit could not be found after the last of us depart (we've not heard much of harrym recently - and I can't last for ever). Hopefully, we've still got chaps like Ian BB and others, who have access to their grand/father's log books and writings (in some cases, the old chap's still alive and able to contribute) and so keep the flag flying - but only for a limited time.
I suppose the real value of us old fossils is that we were there and can tell it exactly how it was (for I'm afraid the revisionist historians hover like vultures all the time). A good example is the Post to Ian BB about "Arnold" which I've just put in: it would seem that his source has implied (probably in all good faith) an explanation of the wastage scandal which simply doesn't hold water. But it fits so nicely that it would certainly pass as truth unless some old codger like me puts his oar in and says: "Hang on, I was there, it wasn't like that at all".
The reaction to "Pearl Harbor" was a story in itself. Their prized Pacific Fleet (or a large part of it) was on the bottom at "Battleship Row" (it was only by the Grace of God that their big Fleet Carriers were at sea, but the Japs didn't know that, or they might have lost some or all of them as well); they were at war with Japan whether they liked it or not; then Hitler seized his chance and declared War on them, too (that really put the cap on it !)
Their only solace was that now they had us as their Gallant Ally - but at that stage of the War, we were hard put to it trying to survive ourselves, never mind helping anybody else !
Danny.
Guest
Posts: n/a
"What is Truth", said Pilate.
Ian,
I'm sorry if I've touched a raw nerve, but I must stand by my own firm recollection. At Carlstrom on 42C (for I can only speak of that: things may have been different elsewhere), I never heard of a single case of one of our number being "washed out" (and sent back to Canada) for any reason other than flying inadequacy or flying discipline.
As any such case would have been a cause célèbre, it would have been widely discussed among us: everyone would have known about it. Simply, there was no such thing ever reported. It would have been impossible to keep it quiet.
What other people may have reported regarding different places at different times I do not know and cannot comment upon. I only affirm what I know.
In any event, a fall in the failure rate from 40% to under 2% (almost overnight) for this reason alone, would imply previous indiscipline on a massive scale - almost a mutiny - and that cannot have escaped record.
Sorry, but I can add nothing more by way of a solution to the problem.
Cheers, Danny.
I'm sorry if I've touched a raw nerve, but I must stand by my own firm recollection. At Carlstrom on 42C (for I can only speak of that: things may have been different elsewhere), I never heard of a single case of one of our number being "washed out" (and sent back to Canada) for any reason other than flying inadequacy or flying discipline.
As any such case would have been a cause célèbre, it would have been widely discussed among us: everyone would have known about it. Simply, there was no such thing ever reported. It would have been impossible to keep it quiet.
What other people may have reported regarding different places at different times I do not know and cannot comment upon. I only affirm what I know.
In any event, a fall in the failure rate from 40% to under 2% (almost overnight) for this reason alone, would imply previous indiscipline on a massive scale - almost a mutiny - and that cannot have escaped record.
Sorry, but I can add nothing more by way of a solution to the problem.
Cheers, Danny.
Who's to know now?
Danny
I understand completely that you must stand by your own firm recollection, but, others in different locations have clearly recorded some of the issues that I have raised here. Vive la difference!
I am warming to your suspicion that "the books were cooked", maybe your VAT inspecting days have given you a nose for such manipulation!
Good day to you sir
Ian BB
I understand completely that you must stand by your own firm recollection, but, others in different locations have clearly recorded some of the issues that I have raised here. Vive la difference!
I am warming to your suspicion that "the books were cooked", maybe your VAT inspecting days have given you a nose for such manipulation!
Good day to you sir
Ian BB
OCU in Canada?
Whilst this thread has temporarily gone back to it's routes to discuss pilot training in the US and Canada, may I ask the great and good a question about continuation training in Canada?
Sadly, a friend of mine died last year and I cannot get my answer from the horses mouth. He trained as a pilot in Canada in late 1944 and, whilst there, went on to train as a bomber pilot on B24 Liberators. Just as he finished his training, the war in Europe finished so he was quickly retrained for operations over Japan. That war finished before he completed that training so he never got to fly on operations. When he got back to the UK all they would let him fly was a Tiger Moth.
One of the stories he related to me described a formation training sortie which was led by the CO. They crossed the border into the USA near Seattle and were fired upon by AA. Apparently, the CO left the formation to proceed on its way and dived down and dropped his practice bombs near the AA guns.
To the CO's subsequent relief, the American senior staff took the view that the gunners deserved what they got for poor aircraft recognition.
One doesn't seem to hear much about UK pilots being trained in operations while in the US or Canada so I wondered if anyone here had any details.
Sadly, a friend of mine died last year and I cannot get my answer from the horses mouth. He trained as a pilot in Canada in late 1944 and, whilst there, went on to train as a bomber pilot on B24 Liberators. Just as he finished his training, the war in Europe finished so he was quickly retrained for operations over Japan. That war finished before he completed that training so he never got to fly on operations. When he got back to the UK all they would let him fly was a Tiger Moth.
One of the stories he related to me described a formation training sortie which was led by the CO. They crossed the border into the USA near Seattle and were fired upon by AA. Apparently, the CO left the formation to proceed on its way and dived down and dropped his practice bombs near the AA guns.
To the CO's subsequent relief, the American senior staff took the view that the gunners deserved what they got for poor aircraft recognition.
One doesn't seem to hear much about UK pilots being trained in operations while in the US or Canada so I wondered if anyone here had any details.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Last Word on the Arnold Scheme Losses in WWII
One last word on this subject, as we are still left with a lingering insinuation (by contemporaries and later historians), that the early draconic "washout" rates in the Arnold Schools were in part the fault of the "bolshie" RAF cadets' attitude to the novel customs and military procedures to which they now had to accustom themselves.
Look at how it must appeared to the individuals. They'd set their hearts on becoming RAF pilots. Against long odds they had been selected, waited patiently until the RAF was ready for them, gone through their Reception Centres and ITWs, and now they were ready for the great day when they'd take to the air at last!
But wartime Britain was no place for elementary flying training ! We were now reliant on the Empire Flying Training Scheme (mainly Canada and Rhodesia). And then came this wonderful gift from the (officially neutral) United States, in the person of General "Hap" Arnold, commanding the South East Flying Training Center of the United States Army Air Corps. He offered the use of a large part of his training organisation to the RAF. This generous offer was snapped up at once !
Not only that, but the US Government authorised the setting up, at the same time, of British Flying Training Schools (providing airfields, camps, aircraft and civil (later allowing RAF) instructors, in the SW States. And all this started in midsummer '41, when USA was still a Neutral ! It must have been one of the most helpful results of Roosevelt's policy of "All Aid short of War".
And so it was that Danny (and the thousands who were to follow him) found himself across the Atlantic, and ended up at Carlstrom Field in Florida under the "Arnold Scheme". And was introduced to the "Stearman", and to a kind and pleasant South Carolinan (Bob Greer), who cannot have been more that two or three years my senior. Together we started my great adventure (and the rest you know).
But the US Army Air Corps had set the bar very high for their own Cadets, and saw no reason to lower it for us. After some ten days some of our comrades started to come back, one by one, and then by twos and threes, at the close of day, ashen-faced, to tell us that they'd been "chopped". Mercifully, they'd be on the train to Canada first thing in the morning, in their chalk-striped grey suits, (for they were officially "civilians").
This blood-bath lasted about a fortnight, then tapered off. That 2/5 of us had disappeared would be a fair estimate, IMHO. At around the 15-20 hr point, we dared to hope that we might yet get through, and in fact most of us did: there were only one or two more (like my room mate, who'd day-dreamed, at circuit height, through an active RLG circuit) who didn't. For we'd heard, on the grapevine, that once through Primary we were nearly safe - the Holy Grail (our Wings) was in sight ! (And so it proved).
What sort of fool would you now need to be to put all this in jeopardy (and maybe lose it all), by some act of foolish buffoonery, or "kicking against the traces", merely to register your annoyance with some American regulation or other which you thought to be pettyfogging and unnecessary ?
The huge bulk of the losses happened as I've described, and in no other way, What about from 42E on ? - maybe they lowered the bar. Don't know.
Danny42C.
Look at how it must appeared to the individuals. They'd set their hearts on becoming RAF pilots. Against long odds they had been selected, waited patiently until the RAF was ready for them, gone through their Reception Centres and ITWs, and now they were ready for the great day when they'd take to the air at last!
But wartime Britain was no place for elementary flying training ! We were now reliant on the Empire Flying Training Scheme (mainly Canada and Rhodesia). And then came this wonderful gift from the (officially neutral) United States, in the person of General "Hap" Arnold, commanding the South East Flying Training Center of the United States Army Air Corps. He offered the use of a large part of his training organisation to the RAF. This generous offer was snapped up at once !
Not only that, but the US Government authorised the setting up, at the same time, of British Flying Training Schools (providing airfields, camps, aircraft and civil (later allowing RAF) instructors, in the SW States. And all this started in midsummer '41, when USA was still a Neutral ! It must have been one of the most helpful results of Roosevelt's policy of "All Aid short of War".
And so it was that Danny (and the thousands who were to follow him) found himself across the Atlantic, and ended up at Carlstrom Field in Florida under the "Arnold Scheme". And was introduced to the "Stearman", and to a kind and pleasant South Carolinan (Bob Greer), who cannot have been more that two or three years my senior. Together we started my great adventure (and the rest you know).
But the US Army Air Corps had set the bar very high for their own Cadets, and saw no reason to lower it for us. After some ten days some of our comrades started to come back, one by one, and then by twos and threes, at the close of day, ashen-faced, to tell us that they'd been "chopped". Mercifully, they'd be on the train to Canada first thing in the morning, in their chalk-striped grey suits, (for they were officially "civilians").
This blood-bath lasted about a fortnight, then tapered off. That 2/5 of us had disappeared would be a fair estimate, IMHO. At around the 15-20 hr point, we dared to hope that we might yet get through, and in fact most of us did: there were only one or two more (like my room mate, who'd day-dreamed, at circuit height, through an active RLG circuit) who didn't. For we'd heard, on the grapevine, that once through Primary we were nearly safe - the Holy Grail (our Wings) was in sight ! (And so it proved).
What sort of fool would you now need to be to put all this in jeopardy (and maybe lose it all), by some act of foolish buffoonery, or "kicking against the traces", merely to register your annoyance with some American regulation or other which you thought to be pettyfogging and unnecessary ?
The huge bulk of the losses happened as I've described, and in no other way, What about from 42E on ? - maybe they lowered the bar. Don't know.
Danny42C.
... and there is the very special nature of this thread, straight from the horse's mouth! Not only succinct, but as ever beautifully written! Thank you Danny.