Aircrews are at the end of their tether

[sangiovese]

Any of you chaps thought about asking either a parliamentary question or talking to the local MP (one of the safest blue constituencies if I remember correctly)?

After all, the senior arsiffers have to answer to them....

[Ghost Dancer]

Short history lesson/reminder.

1982, another fun-filled Pusser's Holiday in the sun.

Brit basic shelter - 6-man tent to contain said personnel plus kit, immersion suits under the safari bed, or hung on the ridge pole, the rest in holdalls wherever there was(n't) space.

US basic shelter - Concertina City, with AC, showers etc. and space for kit.

CC was erected and functioning within 36 hours of the arrival of the equipment.

It was done then and it wasn't even a US conflict. We (they) learn nothing.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

I'm sticking my head above the parapet here and will not complain if I get an arrow in the eye.

I would pick up on a point made earlier that perhaps things will only change after a major accident. Heaven forfend.

I sadly think that this is true.

Its all very well for a Johnny Harrier/Roland Rotary type to pipe up about fields ops and flying. They DO NOT perform 12hrs sorties with the fatigue related to such.

The airlines don't want to spend money on decent hotels, reliable staff travel and ensuring their staff have good morale. However a lot - and all the best of them - do so because they have heeded that quote of chilling clarity that is " If you think flight safety is expensive - try an accident. "

The RAF - unique as it is in British Military aviation - may just have to learn that lesson the hard way I believe.

That fact distresses me enormously. Yes, it does. It means the beancounters have won. It means the spirit, ethos and personal character which delivered to us the best Air Force in the world has gone.

I fear it will never return.

WWW

[Dissi Loo Shunned]

Well Wee W. Welshman you asked for an arrow!
I was a "Johnny Harrier" mate on field deployments and believe me, if you think that nights in field accommodation followed by 9 hours strapped to a bang seat on a 6 sortie, cockpit turn, high workload , single seat environment compares in any way to "12 hours" in the transport environment you are sadly mistaken. I know cos I now do that Ultra long haul thing for a living and believe me, its a piece of wee wee in comparison.

For all the rest of you who bleat about the terrible flight safety risks and waiting for a "captain with a backbone" to declare his crew unfit - for gods sake! I thought the Air force I served was a professional outfit. That means if you are not fit to fly, you stand there and declare it, you do notlook for the nearest adult to hold your hand. Grow up and if you don't have the spine to take the pressure of saying to the nearest Grp Cpt why you are not flying then I think we can all see why you're in the transport world!
Partially editted for tooping

[ 03 December 2001: Message edited by: Dissi Loo Shunned ]

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Any fool can be uncomfortable... preparing for WWIII required crews to live in the field. The current situation does not.

WWW

[fat albert]

And I think we can see why you were a Harrier mate....

As for your ultra long haul job I assume it's in a big fluffy 744 that does everything for you and supplies you with a cruise pilot so you can get a bit of kip on the way? Oh, and you had a decent night's sleep in a big fluffy hotel before hand. Piece of wee wee indeed.

Now try it in a 30+ yr old bucket with worse nav kit than most private yachts, carrying more snags than there's space in the 700 to write about having had 8hrs sleep in the last 48 with an 0200 departure for an 8hr leg.

I don't want to get into a willy waving contest here as it's pointless. The gripe is not about field conditions per se but the penny-pinching mindset that allows it to occur when it doesn’t have to. Don't get me wrong, the setup in Thumrait is fine (in my opinion). Same tents, some mess tent, same showers and bogs. Main difference is: only a couple of types operating there (no mixed crew types in same tent) and the accommodation is not on the airfield. I'd happily do a det in Thumrait (no really - go on, send some of us route queens down there - I could do with the hours!) Muscat is multiple types working to totally different schedules all living in the same, small place on an international airport. It is impossible to get any sort of decent kip. Simple as that.

As for "the captains with spine" quip (thanks btw I'll take mine with me next time) this isn't an exercise where it's easy to cry off but an Op where other people are relying on you to do your job. I'm sure loads of the crews (FJ/multi etc) cried off sorties during the Gulf, Boz and Kos etc etc because they were a bit sleepy. Of course they didn't. We in the RAF suffer from professional pride and an individual lack of willingness to be the weakest link. We get the job (however menial you may consider it) done. Unfortunately the powers that be know that and are quite happy to use that against us.

I'm a route Herc mate and won't even begin to compare my bubble-wrap hauling, scrabble playing job with that done by the tanker and recce blokes. I imagine, however, they'll have something to say about your analysis of their particular "piece of wee wee" job.
That said, landing a 50 tonne bucket in crap weather having just spent the last 8 hrs trying to keep your eyes open isn’t always a piece of wee wee. Sadly we’re not blessed with triple INs, Vertical Nav autopilots, auto-throttles, auto-ILS, auto-brakes, auto-taxy and auto-****wiping like some people...

[Dissi Loo Shunned]

Not entirely surprised you both missed the point. WWW - my point is not that such conditions are acceptable and that people should get on with it. My point is that if conditions do not permit you to fly safely because your rest pattern has been disrupted, you do not fly. I do not go along with the argument that as we're on ops we have to do it - horlicks! Do you think any balaklava'd mate would thank you for flying him into a mountain on an exfil cos you're tired? Get real and realise that if you aren't prepared to stand up and be counted ie refuse to fly until the bean-counters authorise suitable accomm (it needn't be hotac-tents are fine as long as they're properly situated and supported)then you will continue to be trampled on.
Fat Albert - If you read my initial piece you'll see that I never said that the tanker or recce roles were a piece of wee wee - I said that the ULH stuff I do is a piece of wee wee from the point of view of the criticality of fatigue on your effectiveness.
Yes my 744 is very fluffy but the pressure is still on when landing at a strange airfield at night, in a monsoon, with 400 bods down the back and 15 mins hold fuel, knowing that if you get it wrong you're out of a job.
I have much respect for the multicrew world but stand by my assertion that it is more critical in the fast jet(especially single seat) environment when operating under fatigue than in the multi world where by definition you should all be watching each others backs. This does not change the fact that people should not bleat on an anonymous forum about how awful it is when if everybody refused to fly because of flight safety - it would not take more than a few hours-things might happen.
Editted for incompetence.

[ 03 December 2001: Message edited by: Dissi Loo Shunned ]

[BEagle]

Disi - my experience of the Harrier GR3 world in the field was only as a desk-sucking blotter-jotter holding pilot-cum-site ops off between my Gnat and Hunter courses back in 1975 (ulp!). Your tents were well sorted, sited and supported and there weren't many of us to a tent. Plus we all rose at dawn and stacked at dusk; you guys worked in an exceptionally demanding environment, but if I remember right it was a STO off the MEXE or grass, about 25 mins airborne and then either a RVL back or VL on the pad, followed by a cockpit turn and re-tasking with perhaps a quick bite - the cycle repeated up to 5 times a day? Very hot, hard work in an unforgiving but very well supported world.

But Bona Mates were very high profile and We had them, but They didn't. The Harrier was an utter revolution and the ultimate aspiration of most wannabee fighter pilots. Contrast that to this farce in Onan (Freudian slip!); our Squirearchy apparently don't give a stuff - or, if they do, they've achieved b*gger all to improve matters. No UK fast jets involved, no interest. That's the way it seems to many!!

[Hengist Pod]

BEagle

How little you know - but how much you think you know.

[BEagle]

Thank you for your constructive comment. The point of which eludes me.

[Dan Winterland]

Dissi - it's you who's missing the point. There is an alternative to this unsuitable accommodation, which for financial reasons is not being used. The net result could (and nearly has been) an avoidable accident.

This goes against all we have learned from expensive mistakes in the past. If there was no alternative, that would be a different thing.

PS. I was involved in a similar op in the same aircraft with similar flying rates once. It was knackering despite getting plenty of rest in a 5* hotel. Last month I did 93 hours in a 744. Piece of wee wee in comparison.

[Talking Radalt]

Err, Wee Weasley Viet-taff insurgent...
"Its all very well for a Johnny Harrier/Roland Rotary type to pipe up about fields ops and flying. They DO NOT perform 12hrs sorties with the fatigue related to such."
News to me, ****. You think choppers only go for quick 30 minutes whazzes when there's entire ships to unload, injured climbers to find or 1000 troops to rotate through Aldergrove? And I also guarantee the noise , vibration and light levels in any helicopter are far far far worse than in what ever flying playbus you operate.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Talking Radalt - you might have a point there.

WWW

[sangiovese]

This thread appears to be getting rather childish. Stories of living in squalor and 'I had it harder than you, living in t'shoebox in t'road' are not going to help.

The basic fact lies in that we have been let down. Granted the AT/AAR fleet has lived in nice hotels in the past, but that is no reason that now we should pay for it. The demand is not for 5* accomodation. It is simply for a decent nights sleep, tent, hut or hotel, but not next to an active runway during real-world, maximum tasking ops.

We have been let down by all. And if the stories of Condors and HF reports not being answered are true, then the goodwill of the IFS organisation and its impartiality in preventing accidents has been lost. FJ, RW or ME we should be supporting each other in this. We should be helping each other as a team in geting hygienic, reasonable conditions.

This is likely to be the first of many ops under the banner of fighting terror. If we don't beat the budget managers now, then when or if the FJ or RW world gets heavily involved, don't come crying on here about having it hard. The precedence will have been set. And if we were seen to live with it, then so will you.

[noprobs]

There still seems to be a strange void between most of the complainers here and those they perceive as "the powers that be". To see criticism of "the Squirearchy" in a post that concedes the value of the old Harrier Force is particularly odd. In those heady RAFG days in 75, the head of the Squirearchy was a flight commander on 3(F), living in a tent like the rest of the pilots. If that wasn't enough to teach him the value of seeking home comforts for the troops, read about how he got his DFC; living in a tin box that is the prime target for revenge when you're not out getting shot at from the ground also teaches the value of adequate rest facilities.

And if you think the staff officers at Group aren't doing the business, tell PMA you want to swap places. Let the desk officers suffer some hardship, while you show your mates how to get it sorted. The reason operators are put in those staff positions is just so that these things can be dealt with by someone who understands.

[Dissi Loo Shunned]

Chaps, please go back and read my two previous posts when passions aren't running high and you will see that I most certainly do not advocate living in such conditions. I merely point out that as professional aviators, the individual has the ultimate responsibility for his/her declaration of fitness to fly.
Dan Wint-it is because there is other suitable accomm. that makes this issue all the more critical. If there was no alternative then their arseships might have a leg to stand on when ordering you to get on with it. As it is, if everyone - not the Detco,not the captains,not just the pilots said "I'm sorry but due to a disrupted sleep pattern as a result of the living conditions, I am not fit to fly", then something would be done. Show me the Grp Capt who would order his crews to fly when they have declared themselves unfit to do so. If your argument is "well that would be the end of my career", I would say that if things are as bad as are reported (and I'm sure that they are), then your little pink bottom doesn't mean as much to you as mine does to me!
Beagle - thanks for your comments. I think you got my point that all types encounter different environmental stressors at different times - notice, different not less or more. I objected to WWW's assertion that truckies were the only ones who flew tired.
Lastly, I will state again the core of my argument. No-one should have to accept conditions which compromise their ability to carry out their role safely, if there is no alternative to these conditions (heli FOB for example). If someones' ability is compromised, it is up to them alone, in the first instance, to ensure that themselves, their crew, other operators and lastly their aircraft are not endangered. They do this by declaring themselves unfit to fly. In the current Op there are no excuses for not doing this!

[BEagle]

noprobs - no-one in those 'staff positions' has had to put up with the current squalor in Onan. Dissi has explained things with clarity and others have put the situation into context. But some things I heard yesterday were interesting:

"I've been in the RAF since 1962 and I've never had to tolerate such conditions before" - a chap who has served in most operational theatres and who has been involved in certain events probably still N2K/OSA.

"We were asked how many Gp Air Staff Orders we're having to break to do the Op. We said that it was about 8 or 9" - a member of a returning crew.

"The Big Cheese was made to look in the BFOT. He recoiled in horror at the sight and smell" - another returnee.

"IFS said that it's between the Det and Group - nothing to do with them" - another returnee.

That last remark was distinctly worrying. If it was true and not just a slanderous comment, then things need a shake-up at IFS!

[Fliesty]

I am just about to go out to the place upon which this thread is based and I have read with interest many of the points that have been raised. I think that the idea of standing up and declaring yourself unfit to fly is indeed an ideal! Having spoken to some close friends who have been out there, when the conditions were very poor, they said,
"It is not that easy"!
I understand that the conditions have improved, I will certainly see for myself very shortly. I think that the underlying fact is, and I know that I am essentially repeating what has already been said, that a small amount of money spent by those, who it seems are firmly detached from the situation out there, would indeed make things exponentially better!

I just hope that this "accident", that has regularly been referred to, is not what it takes for things to change significantly and also that it never happens.

[Grimweasel]

It seems as if many have forgotten the fact that they are employed by the Royal Air FORCE! This is a fighting force, not BA. The old crew duty and perfect sleep issue are surely not applicable in time of conflict.

Tank commanders have an equally demanding responsibility in terms of cost of equipmnet etc. They would not dream of raising issues like this.

Having served with all aircraft types in the RAF it becomes apparent that the Transport/AAR fleet have the worst reputations when it comes to HOTAC etc.

It's as if there is a hidden mafia within the RAF protecting their right to drain the tax payer. The HOTAC/ Rates issue always causes a stir. It's because everyone has become so accustomed to it, that when its withdrawn, for what ever reason, they all start whining!

Senior Officers won't do much about it, as they came through the same system and see it as one of their perks.

The rotary lads get on with it, as do the Army. The whining must stop as it's bad for everyone and causes rifts. The alternative is a nice insecure job flying self loading freight for the Airlines.

Gentlemen, show some alligance and unity and lets get on with the job of eliminating terrorist scum!

[JimNich]

Er, Grimweasel, I think you might've missed the point mate. I also think people who use the "time of conflict" spin to excuse blatant disregard for flight safety should maybe go and spend some time with families who've lost nearest and dearest in avoidable accidents. (you don't work for IFS by any chance?)