WSOp's/WSO's at Kinloss, what does the future hold?
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kinloss
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no doubt that there will be a lot of dis-established posts, at Kinloss and other maritime support units, currently filled by WSOps. However, it would be entirely wrong to assume that only the current incumbents are in line for redundancy.
Manning desks will be directed to remove their pics at the above units thus creating a manning surplus across the whole Service, not simply at Kinloss. All personnel, throughout the Service, in the surplus ranks and trades will be affected. You might be in Vegas, right now, but you are as vulnerable to redundancy as the Kinloss wet man.
You could be a tristar FS eng or ALM, thinking that this has nothing to do with you, but if you have not been anything special in the promotion boards recently you will be in line for the boot to make way for fresh blood from Kinloss.
Maritime WSOps: this is a Service-wide problem, not just maritime. Your expectations/hopes to remain in the RAF are just as valid as every other WSOp, wherever they are. Yes, you can expect to move from Kinloss within the next year or so, if you remain in the RAF.
Good luck, everyone.
Regards
Ed
Manning desks will be directed to remove their pics at the above units thus creating a manning surplus across the whole Service, not simply at Kinloss. All personnel, throughout the Service, in the surplus ranks and trades will be affected. You might be in Vegas, right now, but you are as vulnerable to redundancy as the Kinloss wet man.
You could be a tristar FS eng or ALM, thinking that this has nothing to do with you, but if you have not been anything special in the promotion boards recently you will be in line for the boot to make way for fresh blood from Kinloss.
Maritime WSOps: this is a Service-wide problem, not just maritime. Your expectations/hopes to remain in the RAF are just as valid as every other WSOp, wherever they are. Yes, you can expect to move from Kinloss within the next year or so, if you remain in the RAF.
Good luck, everyone.
Regards
Ed
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: england
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
admin guru
Admin guru,
The list of soon to be closed bases was speculation on my part, given what's happened and what is likely to happen, i.e a single point of entry to the RAF. I can't see the likes of Halton being retained, however time will tell. There was a SPP study in 2008 which supported closing it, however I understand politics won the day then. I imagine a much reduced RAF will no longer require 2xPhase 1 training units and Cranwell will win the fight to see which one closes. The Army have a habit of taking over former RAF bases i.e Bassingbourn, North Luffenham, Swanton Morley, Bruggen, Innsworth, Stafford, Brawdy, hence my assumption they'll probably take a few more on given the drawdown in Germany. I'm sure the Army planners will look at the facilities/housing available and find some suitable units to move in.
The list of soon to be closed bases was speculation on my part, given what's happened and what is likely to happen, i.e a single point of entry to the RAF. I can't see the likes of Halton being retained, however time will tell. There was a SPP study in 2008 which supported closing it, however I understand politics won the day then. I imagine a much reduced RAF will no longer require 2xPhase 1 training units and Cranwell will win the fight to see which one closes. The Army have a habit of taking over former RAF bases i.e Bassingbourn, North Luffenham, Swanton Morley, Bruggen, Innsworth, Stafford, Brawdy, hence my assumption they'll probably take a few more on given the drawdown in Germany. I'm sure the Army planners will look at the facilities/housing available and find some suitable units to move in.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do aircrew ever do tours as FACs/JTACs these days, or is that now strictly the preserve of Rockapes and trained Army/Marine bods? One would have thought that some NCA going spare might come in handy if the Army starts running short, given their knowledge of airmanship, met and communications to a limited extent.
Also heard a rumour that RPAS systems are soon going to be mostly WSOps with a sensor operator background?
Also heard a rumour that RPAS systems are soon going to be mostly WSOps with a sensor operator background?
Last edited by WannabeCrewman; 4th Nov 2010 at 10:27.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The training system is currently full to overflowing, add to that the cost of getting rid of "qualified" people simply to re train "non qualified" people then you will quickly see that what you suggest, just like the whole WSOp system, is sadly nothing more than a pipe dream.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Scotland
Age: 50
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EdSett, I'm not doubting your knowledge and I assume being at Kinloss you're pretty much as informed as anyone else up there - but the statement about the promotion boards doesn't hold water for many WSOps. A large number of WSOp Sgts have yet to appear on the promotion boards due to the time bar - how do these guys/girls stand?
I would doubt that potential redundancies would be solely decided on promotion board results, although I'm happy to be corrected.
I would doubt that potential redundancies would be solely decided on promotion board results, although I'm happy to be corrected.
Gentleman Aviator
Petasus ... it was ad hoc Reverse Promotion Boards in the past and may be again. And I guess there's no time-bar for those!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Not quite where I'd like to be
Age: 65
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And I guess there's no time-bar for those!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As has been posted elsewhere, predicating redundancy purely on performance (promotion boards or annual reports) is contrary to the spirit of UK employment law.
Nowadays all public sector employers (including the MOD) stick strictly to the laws and guidelines laid down in legislation.
I'm out now, so no longer current, but in the past when a redundancy tranche was announced, the criteria was detailed at the same time...usually with the caveat that voluntary quotas will be filled first.
Whilst the terms of redundancy may change, the process is unlikely to change......much.
Nowadays all public sector employers (including the MOD) stick strictly to the laws and guidelines laid down in legislation.
I'm out now, so no longer current, but in the past when a redundancy tranche was announced, the criteria was detailed at the same time...usually with the caveat that voluntary quotas will be filled first.
Whilst the terms of redundancy may change, the process is unlikely to change......much.
Surely, if there is a surplus of qualified aircrew, the RAF should immediately slap a ban on pilot recruitment until it is sorted out.
Most AEOp and Navs could easily be trained up as pilots particularly for the non pointly fleets. Most would have the aptitude and the need to pass Crandits should not be used as a way to delay and block applicants who have already demonstrated their skils in the airborne environment.
Fast track them and ensure that pilot is open to all as a realistic option.
These are exceptional times Its time to tear up the old rule book and concentrate on getting well qualified dedicated professionals into appropriate alternative positions, quickly and cost effectively without wasting yet more taxpayer's money. These people are already there, the taxpayer has invested a lot in them. Retrain them! Flying a modern multi engined aircraft is just not that difficult.
If the RAF is talking redundancy, then rule number one is to first seek suitable alternative positions. Until that is done, recruitment should stop.
Most AEOp and Navs could easily be trained up as pilots particularly for the non pointly fleets. Most would have the aptitude and the need to pass Crandits should not be used as a way to delay and block applicants who have already demonstrated their skils in the airborne environment.
Fast track them and ensure that pilot is open to all as a realistic option.
These are exceptional times Its time to tear up the old rule book and concentrate on getting well qualified dedicated professionals into appropriate alternative positions, quickly and cost effectively without wasting yet more taxpayer's money. These people are already there, the taxpayer has invested a lot in them. Retrain them! Flying a modern multi engined aircraft is just not that difficult.
If the RAF is talking redundancy, then rule number one is to first seek suitable alternative positions. Until that is done, recruitment should stop.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
biddedout, there was a nav cross-over system a few year ago but that was to address a pilot shortage. With the cancellation if the Nimrod, draw down on C130, withdrawal of the Harrier etc that is probably not the case now.
To stop recruiting for a year is not the answer either as there needs to be a range of recruits of a given age. If you re-tread all 25-30 year olds you would increase the average age and create an age gap that would bite in future years.
To stop recruiting for a year is not the answer either as there needs to be a range of recruits of a given age. If you re-tread all 25-30 year olds you would increase the average age and create an age gap that would bite in future years.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: planet earth
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice idea but it will never work.
I remember a lecture way back about the Royal Navy. During it, the subject of manning came up and the presenter ( a 1* IIRC ) stated that one of the biggest mistakes the RN made was to halt all recruiting in the mid 1990's. The effect was to create a demographic / rank " back hole " which was working it's way through the system and its negative effects would be felt for 20 odd years. I stand by to be corrected by the Navy types
Reduce, yes - but to stop is not a good idea as we will always need young blood. Sounds like a bitter pill to swallow. As for the x - over you still have the problem of X chasing Y slots and you have to open the competition up to all, otherwise it's an HR train wreck and the D word will get wheeled out very quickly.
I remember a lecture way back about the Royal Navy. During it, the subject of manning came up and the presenter ( a 1* IIRC ) stated that one of the biggest mistakes the RN made was to halt all recruiting in the mid 1990's. The effect was to create a demographic / rank " back hole " which was working it's way through the system and its negative effects would be felt for 20 odd years. I stand by to be corrected by the Navy types
Reduce, yes - but to stop is not a good idea as we will always need young blood. Sounds like a bitter pill to swallow. As for the x - over you still have the problem of X chasing Y slots and you have to open the competition up to all, otherwise it's an HR train wreck and the D word will get wheeled out very quickly.
Fair points, but I am just thinking about a relatively small number to ease the overall overburden. Not everyone would be interested anyway. I don't know how things are these days, but I just thin since the Airforce is now run by accountants and speaks HR, then it's time to play to the civillian rules and look at downsizing and potential redundancy the way it would be dealt with in a big company. The Air Force knows its AE's and Navs very well and in the case of AEops it is time to drop all the Officer first bo@@ocks. If there are a small number of vacancies, put some the expensive, highly trained known quantities in the front seats as well as the back whenever possible. They will cope, its just a matter of training.
I can see the problems though, there is only room for one Harrier pilot and asociated baggage in each airline and we already have one. Its going to take a long time to mop up the surplus.
I can see the problems though, there is only room for one Harrier pilot and asociated baggage in each airline and we already have one. Its going to take a long time to mop up the surplus.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the RAFs overburden of pilots is going to sort itself out pretty damn quickly.
The MOD should be asking themselves how they intend to keep in the large numbers of weary and experienced people in from flocking to the emergency exit once they are offered optional redundancy on top of their full gratuity and pension.
BBC News - Airline pilot shortage facing UK, union Balpa warns
I think BALPA should know its pretty bl00dy obvious where the pilots will come from to fill this looming gap.
The posters know this. And the problem isnt just looming in the UK.
Google "Lack of Pilots" and you will see it is a global phenomenon.
The MOD should be asking themselves how they intend to keep in the large numbers of weary and experienced people in from flocking to the emergency exit once they are offered optional redundancy on top of their full gratuity and pension.
BBC News - Airline pilot shortage facing UK, union Balpa warns
I think BALPA should know its pretty bl00dy obvious where the pilots will come from to fill this looming gap.
The posters know this. And the problem isnt just looming in the UK.
Google "Lack of Pilots" and you will see it is a global phenomenon.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Midlands
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C130jbloke - Corrected by an RAF source on behalf of the RN.
Source Defence Professionals in the UK and France - the graph outflow reflects the last round of culling.....
Inflow and outflow of Naval Service officers and other ranks, 1993/94 to 2003/04
Source Defence Professionals in the UK and France - the graph outflow reflects the last round of culling.....
Inflow and outflow of Naval Service officers and other ranks, 1993/94 to 2003/04
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: planet earth
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JAO,
I see it, but what is the ratio of Officers / ORs within the graph ? The 94 - 96 intake bars look thin enough to have not contained any enlisted personnel at all........
Still not a lot when you consider the strength of the RN at that time - 50 000+ ?
Once again, if I am wrong feel free to correct
I see it, but what is the ratio of Officers / ORs within the graph ? The 94 - 96 intake bars look thin enough to have not contained any enlisted personnel at all........
Still not a lot when you consider the strength of the RN at that time - 50 000+ ?
Once again, if I am wrong feel free to correct
Last edited by c130jbloke; 4th Nov 2010 at 19:47. Reason: Rubbish spelling
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Midlands
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C130jbloke -
Click on the link on my previous post for the OR graph -
During it, the subject of manning came up and the presenter ( a 1* IIRC ) stated that one of the biggest mistakes the RN made was to halt all recruiting in the mid 1990's.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
justanopinion, fascinating graphs, especiall the rank profiles. A quick eyeball seems to show the Army officers get their majority before the other Services and the RAF has flt lt long after the RN. In the Army the default rank appears to be major after 13 years with no captains visible.
That accounts for some inter-service willy waving with lt col thinking they are more important than we think they are
That accounts for some inter-service willy waving with lt col thinking they are more important than we think they are
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did you ever wonder why they ended up as AEOp's and Nav's
It's not just about whether you can pole an aircraft around, it's either about getting the right sort of basic chap who can then be moulded for future stardom etc, or having the ability to 'manoeuvre' your hands around at the bar - both seem to be considered important.
Of course, if you actually decide that it's okay to recruit the majority of pilots for their pole waggling skills, and to (perhaps) just ensure sufficient good eggs enter as officers to provide the future leadership, then there's no reason why NCOs can't fly aircraft.
In fact I'm sure you could produce posters for pilot applicants that promised they'd be LAC's on exiting training with the prospect of corporal's tapes after 5 years for those who really shine and there'd still be 100 applicants for every bang seat.
Dave