NCO pilots in the RAF?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: s of 55N
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NCO pilots in the RAF?
A cheap quality solution to a desperate manning situation? Or, not viable and wouldn't fit in with the RAF's commisioned pilot ethos?
The army do it. Should the light blue persue it? So 2 speak.
The army do it. Should the light blue persue it? So 2 speak.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: ISLE OF MAN
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
they dont't have anything that costs fifty million if you blunt it - NCO isn't accountable enough. He told me to do it sir!
By the way, this is a well hammered thread, but welcome anyway
By the way, this is a well hammered thread, but welcome anyway
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Sunning it up
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So here we go again, opening up the same old can of worms. How many times does this have to be discussed in this forum.
As always the simple truth is that the RAF are too pompous to accept that NCO's are just as capable of doing the job as their commisioned brethren. We only have to look at the AAC to see that the combination not only works, but flourishes.
As for the argument that the NCO isn't accountable for a fifty million pound piece of hardware, I would like you to show me anyone that has been held culpable, and responsible, for refunding the cost of damages incurred in writing off an aircraft.
So, in summary, let us move on from the dark ages and embrace, not shy away from, the future.
lazy fairweather PPRuNer
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Forres,Scotland
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can rag Standto all you want but the simple truth is that his stance (or the one he suggests)epitomises the attitude of the Upper Echelons. Unfortunately they have a million arguments just like this to convince themselves that NCO Pilots in the RAF just wouldn't work (trust me I've heard them all).
Even when faced with the fact there used to be Non-commissioned Lightening Pilots (how much did they cost in todays money?) you'll still get the same old lines.
Shame really, I reckon it'd do the trade good to have a different side to the cadre other than the usual Uni/UAS guys.
Even when faced with the fact there used to be Non-commissioned Lightening Pilots (how much did they cost in todays money?) you'll still get the same old lines.
Shame really, I reckon it'd do the trade good to have a different side to the cadre other than the usual Uni/UAS guys.
Inter Arma Enim Silentius Lex Legis
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The real answer why is so very simple.
If I were an NCO pilot no Wing Commander or Group Captain would EVER be able to bully me into breaking the rules in a peace time environment. And yes, the current operation IS still governed by our peacetime rules. Although you wouldn't know it!! Bend? no sir it snapped!!
But when a Ruperts career caption comes on under pressure from a senior, well flt Safety can be compromised in order to complete the impossible.
Yes gentlemen, NCO's as well we all know, tend to have more back bone and spinal tissue. Wouldn't fit well in the scheme of things would it!!
If I were an NCO pilot no Wing Commander or Group Captain would EVER be able to bully me into breaking the rules in a peace time environment. And yes, the current operation IS still governed by our peacetime rules. Although you wouldn't know it!! Bend? no sir it snapped!!
But when a Ruperts career caption comes on under pressure from a senior, well flt Safety can be compromised in order to complete the impossible.
Yes gentlemen, NCO's as well we all know, tend to have more back bone and spinal tissue. Wouldn't fit well in the scheme of things would it!!
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: England
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A very old thorny subject for the RAF. It would only take a level headed study to reveal that there is little diference between a Flt Lt and an Army Snco Pilot in either ability or aptitude. It makes me laugh when I hear of sums like 50 million squid come into the argument, the Apache is well on the way to that value and the responsibility for its well being in flight is not shirked by the Snco pilots that fly it.
I can only add that there are a number of serving RAF officers that were either Army Sncos or LE Officers, seems like it's a no brainer to me! (excluding AJ of course)
I can only add that there are a number of serving RAF officers that were either Army Sncos or LE Officers, seems like it's a no brainer to me! (excluding AJ of course)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Rompers Green
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Random thoughts...
I thought the Ops Support Branch was formed because we didn't have enough aircrew officers to fill all the staff jobs! Some folk I know whinge about OSB lacking the experience/quality/savvy of aircrew and would much rather have staff officers and ops officers who are aircrew(as long as its not them!) The sad truth is that most staff in HQs (particularly when light blue works in head-sheds with khaki & dark blue) need to be officers otherwise they just get ignored! Where do we get staff officers from? The front line, which is a very small pool to fish in these days! My point is this: dilute the pool even further by filling slots with SNCOs and you'll lose even more aviator-input in areas such as policy, plans, equipment, warfighting etc. etc. I'm not sure that's a good thing. But then, that's why we have a General Duties Branch, isn't it?
I thought the Ops Support Branch was formed because we didn't have enough aircrew officers to fill all the staff jobs! Some folk I know whinge about OSB lacking the experience/quality/savvy of aircrew and would much rather have staff officers and ops officers who are aircrew(as long as its not them!) The sad truth is that most staff in HQs (particularly when light blue works in head-sheds with khaki & dark blue) need to be officers otherwise they just get ignored! Where do we get staff officers from? The front line, which is a very small pool to fish in these days! My point is this: dilute the pool even further by filling slots with SNCOs and you'll lose even more aviator-input in areas such as policy, plans, equipment, warfighting etc. etc. I'm not sure that's a good thing. But then, that's why we have a General Duties Branch, isn't it?
lazy fairweather PPRuNer
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Forres,Scotland
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TB,
Yeah, can't argue with that. However, wouldn't a turning jump shot be to get rid of Officer Spec Aircrew. You could cut it up like this: All those taking commissions are in it for the long haul whether they like it or not (and sure, some won't make it far), and those with non-commissions effectively become what is now Pilot Spec Aircrew(saving the dear old tax payer an effing mint).
Okay, very old ground. I know we've been through it a gizillion times but I just find it more interesting than whether we should retain saluting or not.
Yeah, can't argue with that. However, wouldn't a turning jump shot be to get rid of Officer Spec Aircrew. You could cut it up like this: All those taking commissions are in it for the long haul whether they like it or not (and sure, some won't make it far), and those with non-commissions effectively become what is now Pilot Spec Aircrew(saving the dear old tax payer an effing mint).
Okay, very old ground. I know we've been through it a gizillion times but I just find it more interesting than whether we should retain saluting or not.
Guest
Posts: n/a
It seems a lot of very capable NCO aircrew end up commissioned in General Duties anyway (with recent examples passing out top of their IOT intake), perhaps further strengthening the argument for NCO pilots / navs - does IOT make them more capable?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Liverpool based Geordie, so calm down, calm down kidda!!
Age: 60
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
6 Posts
stop whinging and inter service slagging and start putting reasoned arguments, you might get further with this VERY GOOD idea. write REAL letters to the powers to be, for a while they will be 'soft and absorbent', maybe, just maybe, people will listen.......................
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 76
Posts: 3,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its been a wee while since I wore a Blue suit so do forgive me for butting in.
In the twenty-first century, what exactly would be the difference between an NCO pilot and a Commissioned pilot? Wouldn't both have to get through the aircrew selection process, demonstrating the necessary physical coordination, mental agility, a correct psychological profile and all that stuff before being let lose on the taxpayers' expensive flying machines?
So, its a class distinction thing then? Are the Army still class conscious and that is the reason why non-commisioned pilots are nowadays all brown-jobs?
Actually as an ex-sergeant myself I consider that all pilots should be NCO's. Officers are all right in their way, but if you want a job done properly its the Sergeants and Chiefy's that the military rely on to get it done
:
**********************************
Through difficulties to the cinema
In the twenty-first century, what exactly would be the difference between an NCO pilot and a Commissioned pilot? Wouldn't both have to get through the aircrew selection process, demonstrating the necessary physical coordination, mental agility, a correct psychological profile and all that stuff before being let lose on the taxpayers' expensive flying machines?
So, its a class distinction thing then? Are the Army still class conscious and that is the reason why non-commisioned pilots are nowadays all brown-jobs?
Actually as an ex-sergeant myself I consider that all pilots should be NCO's. Officers are all right in their way, but if you want a job done properly its the Sergeants and Chiefy's that the military rely on to get it done
:**********************************
Through difficulties to the cinema
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: KLMUK STANSTED
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm an ex blue, as of 9 months ago, but not an NCO, and it really hacks me off to see this kind of negative response to NCO's, I'm an ex tg12 (scopie) and we have plenty of very capable Snco's as fighter controllers, they actually tell the jet jockey's what to do!! Just think how much the Government would save, instead of having to train, pay, and then pension the ruperts (officers).
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oooo, it's all getting very heated! In my humble opinion, I don't think this has got anything to do with "the class thing" at all. I'm not qualified to comment on the AAC being a light blue suiter, but I'm sure it is a system that works very well. However, the service that seems to get the biggest hard-on about the whole class thing is the Army, whether it is the Ruperts going to their black-tie dinners once a week or the NCO's who are constantly telling us that Officers are not real people and they were all born with a silver spoon and nanny to sing sweet songs in the nursary. Contrary to popular belief, this is not the case, certainly in the RAF anyway. The whole Officer/NCO argument boils down to one thing-people, on both sides of the fence have pre-conceived ideas about the other, probably because somewhere along the line they were offended in some way by someone from the "otherside". The RAF chooses to have Officer pilots. Now I suspect that if you asked an 18 year old if he wanted to fly fast jets, but there were no Officer slots left and he had to join as an NCO, he wouldn't give two hoots. However, the RAF has chosen this way, because it can afford to. There are so many people who want to join as a pilot, by setting this entry criteria (i.e. Officer/added entry requirements/IOT etc) you have to go that extra mile to prove that you really want this job. That's NOT saying that you need acedemics to fly, far from it. It just goes to prove your commitment to the career that you are pursuing. Flying in HM Forces IS a privilage, whatever the cynical whingers in the bar may say, and flying in the RAF is the primary existance for it, as opposed to the Army I belive you join first and then decide what you want to do. So come on guys (gals), we're all on the same side after all-who cares what rank slide you wear. The system works just fine for each service, just accept it and don't judge a chap solely on the mess that he eats in.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Down t' south
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Beermonkey! Really annoys me when people write a load of absolute crap about the 'class struggle' here.
I have no doubt that what rank you wear makes no difference to how good your flying is. The issue here is the entry requirements to the service that the RAF sees as the minimum for academic success in pilot training. If an potential NCO is capable of flying a Typhoon, like most guys joining aspire to do, then all he has to do is get two A-levels before he joins and pass IOT instead. Not really that difficult as entry requirements go! (The tricky bit as we all know being the selection against other candidates of similar qualifications and streaming etc etc.)
There is no General Melchett type 'hairy's couldn't do the job' attitude that some seem to think, it is simply that the RAF has laid down its requirements (as the Navy has.) If you are good enough, you will be selected. So get the academic results before you join or try for a cross over once you're in!
Rant over!
I have no doubt that what rank you wear makes no difference to how good your flying is. The issue here is the entry requirements to the service that the RAF sees as the minimum for academic success in pilot training. If an potential NCO is capable of flying a Typhoon, like most guys joining aspire to do, then all he has to do is get two A-levels before he joins and pass IOT instead. Not really that difficult as entry requirements go! (The tricky bit as we all know being the selection against other candidates of similar qualifications and streaming etc etc.)
There is no General Melchett type 'hairy's couldn't do the job' attitude that some seem to think, it is simply that the RAF has laid down its requirements (as the Navy has.) If you are good enough, you will be selected. So get the academic results before you join or try for a cross over once you're in!
Rant over!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Basingstoke
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The turning point in moving to all officer aircrew in the RAF came with the introduction of the V-Bombers. Someone declared that the V's should be an all commissioned crew and with there being a slot for an Air Electronics Officer (AEO)the only source was the Maritime/Tranport world and a bunch of NCO Signallers were sent for Officer training. Unfortunately they did themselves no good by for ever complaining about their Mess bills in the Officers Mess, with comments like 'I only paid ten bob in the Sgts Mess and now I'm being charged £5.
lazy fairweather PPRuNer
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Forres,Scotland
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beer Monkey,
I agree with the sentiment regarding the reverse snobbery prevelant amongst some in the Ranks. There's no place for it, it is totally unnecessary and those that espouse it are usually failed commissioned applicants anyway.
What I don't agree with is this "its all the same anyway" viewpoint. The thrust of my argument is that NCOs and Officers necessarily have two very different career progression ladders. On the NCO front he will be judged very much on his proffessionalism, competence and ability. The Officers however have another dimension to contend with. They have to walk the assesment tightrope, choosing the correct path in every decision they make. One false move and they may well foul any chance of a significantly senior position further on in their careers.
To achieve high Office Officers must fill suitable posts early on so that they gather the necessary credentials vital to command and manage. The NCO is and always will be a "front line first" beast and can remain in flying or training posts for the entirety of his enlistment.
So for my money, NCO pilots make sense on two fronts, First they're slightly cheaper and secondly they come in a colourful jacket with the words "Don't Panic" written in big friendly letters on the front.
I agree with the sentiment regarding the reverse snobbery prevelant amongst some in the Ranks. There's no place for it, it is totally unnecessary and those that espouse it are usually failed commissioned applicants anyway.
What I don't agree with is this "its all the same anyway" viewpoint. The thrust of my argument is that NCOs and Officers necessarily have two very different career progression ladders. On the NCO front he will be judged very much on his proffessionalism, competence and ability. The Officers however have another dimension to contend with. They have to walk the assesment tightrope, choosing the correct path in every decision they make. One false move and they may well foul any chance of a significantly senior position further on in their careers.
To achieve high Office Officers must fill suitable posts early on so that they gather the necessary credentials vital to command and manage. The NCO is and always will be a "front line first" beast and can remain in flying or training posts for the entirety of his enlistment.
So for my money, NCO pilots make sense on two fronts, First they're slightly cheaper and secondly they come in a colourful jacket with the words "Don't Panic" written in big friendly letters on the front.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: ISLE OF MAN
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blimey, I was only joking!
As far as I'm concerned, do the same job, get the same money. Also, the 'go that extra mile argument is probably dead in the water'.
As Jez Clarkson demonstrated, any clown can fly the typhoon, so why are we spending squillions on pilot training when we could just set up a load pf PS2's at OASC and see which pimply faced youth get the top score. Following that, bang a set of stripes on their shoulder and strap them into an aircraft which, if its computers go wrong, it IS going to drop out of the sky. Could even save the cost of installing a bang seat as the driver would clearly be expendable.
(if that doesn't get em going.........)
Seriously though, the whole rank thing is so complex that I don't think it is unravellable any more. Without a complete clean sheet, we are stuck with it.
As far as I'm concerned, do the same job, get the same money. Also, the 'go that extra mile argument is probably dead in the water'.
As Jez Clarkson demonstrated, any clown can fly the typhoon, so why are we spending squillions on pilot training when we could just set up a load pf PS2's at OASC and see which pimply faced youth get the top score. Following that, bang a set of stripes on their shoulder and strap them into an aircraft which, if its computers go wrong, it IS going to drop out of the sky. Could even save the cost of installing a bang seat as the driver would clearly be expendable.
(if that doesn't get em going.........)
Seriously though, the whole rank thing is so complex that I don't think it is unravellable any more. Without a complete clean sheet, we are stuck with it.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jim N-Front line first isn't limited to our NCO bretheren. Not coming from that World, I'm afraid I cannot comment on the NCO career path. As an officer, you're not obliged to follow the standard career path of dotting the i's and crossing the t's in the vain hope of being CAS one day. There are quite a few spec aircrew Flt Lts/Sqn Ldrs who are content to remain on flying duties, so the option to remain at the sharp end is there as an officer. But I take the point that in order to progress, there is normally a "character building tour" somewhere along the way. Slice of lemon in your G&T sir?!