Overworked RAF faces manpower 'crisis'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: mostly on mars
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Overworked RAF faces manpower 'crisis'
The RAF is so short of manpower that some personnel are being forced to spending an entire year way from their home bases, in contravention of the airforce's own guidelines. Short of Aircrew and techies? Now there's a surprise...........NOT
Full story here
Overworked RAF faces manpower 'crisis' - Telegraph
Full story here
Overworked RAF faces manpower 'crisis' - Telegraph
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Well, Lincolnshire
Age: 69
Posts: 1,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gemarriot
You're not Donaldo from E-Goat (and this Forum) by any chance are you? If you aren't, how come you can edit his post on that Forum?
Come clean. I'm sure you'll be welcome.
You're not Donaldo from E-Goat (and this Forum) by any chance are you? If you aren't, how come you can edit his post on that Forum?
Come clean. I'm sure you'll be welcome.
.....I just love it when dimwits like gemarriot/donlado get caught out 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: somewhere special
Age: 46
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and I'm sure Liam fox's suggested "Strategic Defence Review" would be just wonderful and will solve all our manning problems. (not trying to send this thread down that route as Labour Vs Tories defence management has been thrashed ad nausea.)
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
What is the definition of "away" - the sandy/rocky places, with a 3 day trip for RnR, or could it be another UK site that is a few hours drive away?
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Another S**thole
Age: 51
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Harmony guidelines stipulate that it is time away, deployed or detached, from parent unit.
Only duties over 6 days count towards this total.
For the AT fleet this means that all route tasks less than 6 days do not count.
For example, some C-130 crews are averaging 4-5 months away OOA (120-150 days for cash) which exceeds the 140 day harmony figure.
Then you add a possible 30 days of Strat tasking which doesn't count as the trips were less than 6 days! On top of this some units are also tasked with supporting theatre work-up exercises for forces deploying to Afghanistan, usually 3-4 weeks away from the UK. (28 days)
Add to this potential call-outs from standby duties, say 10 days per year for some C-130 units.
So in a standard year most C-130 crews average around 220 days away from their parent unit.
That is just the aircrew - the support staff are even more undermanned and overtasked. The RAF, and certain parts within, are constantly breaking harmony gudelines and will continue to do so even with the drawdown in Iraq
Only duties over 6 days count towards this total.
For the AT fleet this means that all route tasks less than 6 days do not count.
For example, some C-130 crews are averaging 4-5 months away OOA (120-150 days for cash) which exceeds the 140 day harmony figure.
Then you add a possible 30 days of Strat tasking which doesn't count as the trips were less than 6 days! On top of this some units are also tasked with supporting theatre work-up exercises for forces deploying to Afghanistan, usually 3-4 weeks away from the UK. (28 days)
Add to this potential call-outs from standby duties, say 10 days per year for some C-130 units.
So in a standard year most C-130 crews average around 220 days away from their parent unit.
That is just the aircrew - the support staff are even more undermanned and overtasked. The RAF, and certain parts within, are constantly breaking harmony gudelines and will continue to do so even with the drawdown in Iraq
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Beyond PNR
Age: 57
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
stats underling
back in "99 (swings tilly lamp!) for them that can remember them and the endles hours of explosive fun watching a novice try to light them. Any way the point.. Was asked by boss to form a response from command about stats on days away etc. So sent off stats somthing like- average 170, min 145, max 240 all in the last year, however that was defined. Result; Immediate response fro PSO to big stars.."Don't guess I want facts!" ( although I can't remember the actual numbers those I have mentioned will not be too far from the actual. This was in the earlest days of a "max 140 policy". Not content with the Sqn response Admin was consulted, one can only summise that the names were checked and the same response given. A few hour later the stats for 2 years were demanded.. oh and while youre at it.. the last 3 as well ! my Boss at the time was old bold and had a pair. He rang the requestee(if that's a word) and told him to check the stats back to 1918! then he would have his less than 140 days away that he wanted otherwise" F&$% off and face the facts" Sad thing is my Sqn was not unique, far from it. others had it worse.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rotherham
Age: 68
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the real gemarriott
Just to let anybody who is bovvered (I'm not) but the GEMarriott on here is not the same as the GEMarriott on the Goat.
Nor is GEMarriott on the goat the ****** AKA Donaldo, the ability to edit Donaldo's post was by virtue of GEMarriott being a moderator over there. I would have thought you clever winged god types might have twigged that one but apparently not
all the best
the real GEMarriott
Nor is GEMarriott on the goat the ****** AKA Donaldo, the ability to edit Donaldo's post was by virtue of GEMarriott being a moderator over there. I would have thought you clever winged god types might have twigged that one but apparently not
all the best
the real GEMarriott
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Well, Lincolnshire
Age: 69
Posts: 1,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'the ability to edit Donaldo's post'
OK, but would a moderator 'edit' someones post? Surely that could cause all sorts of problems. Delete a post, certainly but to edit............a definite no/no.
'clever winged god types'
Sticks and stones. my dear chap, sticks and stones.
OK, but would a moderator 'edit' someones post? Surely that could cause all sorts of problems. Delete a post, certainly but to edit............a definite no/no.
'clever winged god types'
Sticks and stones. my dear chap, sticks and stones.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Well, Lincolnshire
Age: 69
Posts: 1,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That sense of humour saw me through two wars, numerous 'practice bleeding' scenario's and the odd real bleeding scenario's.
The sense of humour, to me, should be the second piece of kit issued to all Servicemen. Which leaves open a question.....................
My regards to you. (and EGoat).
The sense of humour, to me, should be the second piece of kit issued to all Servicemen. Which leaves open a question.....................
My regards to you. (and EGoat).
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Manning
I confess to not reading the article as I am rather depressed at the current attitude to the Armed Forces. The Tories appear bent on a defence review to save money as highlighted in the Independent. The Lib's want a complete restructure looking at their policies so it looks like we are safer now.
I fear "we're all doooooomed"!
I fear "we're all doooooomed"!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Tories appear bent on a defence review to save money as highlighted in the Independent.
How about instead of the bloke on the front line getting the scraps of the budget, it works the other way around and the money gets tipped in closer to the business end. We could perhaps entitle the scheme 'Front Line First'...
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dallas
I have no problem with a proper Defence review either. However, it is important that it is not just to save money because of the public finances when I can think of a raft of stupid things we now see our tax money being wasted (squandered) on. As an example, why does a pregnant woman require a one off payment of 190 pounds to ensure she eats properly??? We are not a 3rd World nation are we? oh.....
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nav,
Oh I agree - waste is all relative, which is the root of the whole problem. It's no good trying to get the boys and girls to consider restraint when the government stocks its cellars with £180/bottle wine, seemingly gives MPs a blank cheque for their allowances and chucks billions at flawed procurement projects, to name but a few examples.
Don't get me started on the nanny state...
Oh I agree - waste is all relative, which is the root of the whole problem. It's no good trying to get the boys and girls to consider restraint when the government stocks its cellars with £180/bottle wine, seemingly gives MPs a blank cheque for their allowances and chucks billions at flawed procurement projects, to name but a few examples.
Don't get me started on the nanny state...