RAF Reapers in Afghanistan
Thread Starter
RAF Reapers in Afghanistan
RAF outlines Afghan experience with Reaper UAV
How are flying hours logged for this?
Is it considered 'flying' if the pilot / crew are not actually in the air. Do they still get flying pay?
If it is considered as flying, when would it not be considered as flying as some drones are no larger than model aircraft?
How are flying hours logged for this?
Is it considered 'flying' if the pilot / crew are not actually in the air. Do they still get flying pay?
If it is considered as flying, when would it not be considered as flying as some drones are no larger than model aircraft?
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying pay is a retention bonus for aircrew that have an obvious skill that could be transferred to civvie street. whether it is flying a "model" or not it is still a skill that for example a clerk doesnt have.
Would you expect an SF soldier to lose his SF pay if he was doing a job in MoD rather than jumping through embassy windows? or a submariner to ose his submarine pay if he was doing a training job on dry land?
Its the same thing
HG
Would you expect an SF soldier to lose his SF pay if he was doing a job in MoD rather than jumping through embassy windows? or a submariner to ose his submarine pay if he was doing a training job on dry land?
Its the same thing
HG
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Blighty
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircrew (2 per crew) are in a flying role and get flying pay as well as the opportunity for things like "Above average in the air"
The int person is in an int role so doesn't get flying. They are in a role just like they would be back in the UK.
The int person is in an int role so doesn't get flying. They are in a role just like they would be back in the UK.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
BGG, maybe, maybe not.
Take the case of the flying radar station. The UK approach is to take fully competent and trained ground environment personnel of suitable aptitude and fitness and employ them as aircrew for a couple of tours.
The USAF approach was to recruit airborne radar operators. The latter approach means you don't have to train them twice.
So, RAF UAV crews: take aircrew and train them twice.
Alternative: recruit them and train them once.
Take the case of the flying radar station. The UK approach is to take fully competent and trained ground environment personnel of suitable aptitude and fitness and employ them as aircrew for a couple of tours.
The USAF approach was to recruit airborne radar operators. The latter approach means you don't have to train them twice.
So, RAF UAV crews: take aircrew and train them twice.
Alternative: recruit them and train them once.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Age: 35
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No idea what the correct answer is but it seems to me that 'piloting' a UAV is much more akin to simulator time than flying time.
Saintsman
The difference between Reaper and DH3 is HUGE. With DH3 you pre-program a route and then just punt it airborne and it pretty well flies itself and then crash-lands back near you when it is ready. The X-Box controller that is often seen in Army adverts is for controlling the payload (ie. a small EO sensor) and not for flying the aircraft - the control box is for viewing where the DH3 is and for watching the sensor image. The Reaper on the other hand has a pilot at the controls at all times and is flown either through use of throttle/stick, a pre-planned route or an emergency routing should it lose the satellite link.
Here's DH3's control box...
Here's Reaper's control box...(an ISO container! called an MGCS)...
The pilots for Reaper need a full and current Instrument Rating because they fly under IFR - the DH3 operators (not pilots) do not beacuse the do not!
Enough said???
LJ
I am aware that the Reaper is somewhat larger than say a Desert Hawk but both are flown.
I suppose that because Desert Hawk is Army, it doesn't count
I suppose that because Desert Hawk is Army, it doesn't count
Here's DH3's control box...
Here's Reaper's control box...(an ISO container! called an MGCS)...
The pilots for Reaper need a full and current Instrument Rating because they fly under IFR - the DH3 operators (not pilots) do not beacuse the do not!
Enough said???
LJ
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bury St Edmunds.
Age: 60
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Relocation.
Are there any plans to relocate the operation at Creech back to the uk?
I suppose that mutual support would suffer if that happened but maybe technology would ease that situation.
I suppose that mutual support would suffer if that happened but maybe technology would ease that situation.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The MQ-9 has to fly IFR because it cannot fly VFR.....To Fly IFR and perform the entire sortie on instruments - in both IMC and VMC, and to land it on instruments every time, you need an Instrument Rating.
They fly MQ-9s in US National Class A Airspace separated from jumbo jets in LA Centre, et al. They cannot descend below 18k and go VFR like all the Bantaranties...
Keep the questions comming, slowly we will answer them and inform the great 'inquisitive crowd' about some basic facts that make this type of platform unique - and hopefully educate those who might have a desire to one day fly them.
They fly MQ-9s in US National Class A Airspace separated from jumbo jets in LA Centre, et al. They cannot descend below 18k and go VFR like all the Bantaranties...
Keep the questions comming, slowly we will answer them and inform the great 'inquisitive crowd' about some basic facts that make this type of platform unique - and hopefully educate those who might have a desire to one day fly them.