Excess Aircrew
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: between the M6 and M25
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done, you beat me to it I was trying to find that quote.
I have heard that exact quote from CAS himself recently so hopefully it will happen, although the bean counters might overrule him.
I have heard that exact quote from CAS himself recently so hopefully it will happen, although the bean counters might overrule him.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
orgasmic, the Service's manning may be considered as a pyramid.
What you are proposing is to remove a slice - flt ops - and post aircrew in to those jobs. I just feel that solution is illogical. Why take productive personnel and make them redundant and take redundant aircrew and put them in flt ops jobs?
What you are proposing is to remove a slice - flt ops - and post aircrew in to those jobs. I just feel that solution is illogical. Why take productive personnel and make them redundant and take redundant aircrew and put them in flt ops jobs?
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Grabbers, logical. However give me an example of the application of logic.
Jaguar
Harrier
Nimrod
A400
Jaguar
Harrier
Nimrod
A400
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Going deeper underground
Age: 55
Posts: 332
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PN - I am quite aware of how the manning distribution ought to look, thank you.
I am not proposing anything. I am supposing that some of us are more equal than others, a cynical position born out of a 23 yr old commission. When did logic ever trouble our elders and betters in the hunt to meet managerial targets?
The Flt Ops specialisation was created almost overnight to replace aircrew in ground appointments at a time when we were short of aircrew on the front line. We are no longer in that position. If Air Officer Battlespace Management fails to make enough noise on Flt Ops' behalf when the deck chairs are being rearranged, then he may end up with fewer troops under command; they could disappear as quickly as they appeared. As Mahogany Bomber said earlier, they have been under fire since their inception because no-one has championed their cause. They are the ginger step-sons and the RAF's first-born will always win out in the end.
I am not proposing anything. I am supposing that some of us are more equal than others, a cynical position born out of a 23 yr old commission. When did logic ever trouble our elders and betters in the hunt to meet managerial targets?
The Flt Ops specialisation was created almost overnight to replace aircrew in ground appointments at a time when we were short of aircrew on the front line. We are no longer in that position. If Air Officer Battlespace Management fails to make enough noise on Flt Ops' behalf when the deck chairs are being rearranged, then he may end up with fewer troops under command; they could disappear as quickly as they appeared. As Mahogany Bomber said earlier, they have been under fire since their inception because no-one has championed their cause. They are the ginger step-sons and the RAF's first-born will always win out in the end.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the very inception of the Flt Ops specialisation (now branch) it has suffered from a number of unaddressed issues including: the poor quality of some individuals within it; a lack of strategic leadership; no effective STANEVAL post Shawbury; Branch Sponsors with bigger fish to fry and a desire from some other elements of the late and unlamented Ops Spt Branch to take on OpsO posts in order to "broaden" their own officers.
Having been fortunate enough to come to the specialisation at a relatively mature age with life and military experience to match I was then well trained, mentored (and b*ll*cked when necessary) in my JO tours and consequently able to operate effectively. Suffice to say I benefited from being properly selected, trained and mentored which was not unfortunately the case for many of my peers and so the reputation of the branch has been done down for many by the inadequacies of a few.
If a thorough review of how to provide Ops Spt at Sqn, Wg and Stn level is undertaken (without any situating of the appreciation beforehand) and the unbiased answer is to do away with the Flt Ops Branch because of reason x, y and z then so be it. Whilst being familiar with the adage that turkeys don't vote for Christmas I do believe that in the current climate a little less self interest and a little more "for the greater good" wouldn't go amiss. That said, I'd hope to see that spirit from the single-service chiefs first before it's visited on us lesser mortals.
MB
Having been fortunate enough to come to the specialisation at a relatively mature age with life and military experience to match I was then well trained, mentored (and b*ll*cked when necessary) in my JO tours and consequently able to operate effectively. Suffice to say I benefited from being properly selected, trained and mentored which was not unfortunately the case for many of my peers and so the reputation of the branch has been done down for many by the inadequacies of a few.
If a thorough review of how to provide Ops Spt at Sqn, Wg and Stn level is undertaken (without any situating of the appreciation beforehand) and the unbiased answer is to do away with the Flt Ops Branch because of reason x, y and z then so be it. Whilst being familiar with the adage that turkeys don't vote for Christmas I do believe that in the current climate a little less self interest and a little more "for the greater good" wouldn't go amiss. That said, I'd hope to see that spirit from the single-service chiefs first before it's visited on us lesser mortals.
MB
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What would be wrong with considering temporary branch crossover? As long as aircrew mate sees it as an essential aircrew oriented job, both sides have something to gain.
Ops gets to understand things from the aircrew perspective.
Aircrew get to understand actually, we are so drastically under resourced as an organisation and ops, from time to time can make mistakes, but they usually do so after being under-resourced and having an incomplete set of information in front of them. I work with some very talented Ops staff, many of whom having never operated an aircraft, can make far better reasoned judgements into aircraft ops than most aircrew can.
I dont think many Flt Ops guys turn up to work in the morning thinking "you know what, today I cant be @rsed, I think I will screw over a crew".
Ops gets to understand things from the aircrew perspective.
Aircrew get to understand actually, we are so drastically under resourced as an organisation and ops, from time to time can make mistakes, but they usually do so after being under-resourced and having an incomplete set of information in front of them. I work with some very talented Ops staff, many of whom having never operated an aircraft, can make far better reasoned judgements into aircraft ops than most aircrew can.
I dont think many Flt Ops guys turn up to work in the morning thinking "you know what, today I cant be @rsed, I think I will screw over a crew".
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Flt Ops can do a really good job in areas that do not come under the normal purview of aircrew - crash disaster for instance - but can have a weakness regarding operations away from home base - operations by their unit aircraft that is.
There is a lot of 'not been there' 'not done that' 'won't do that so not relevant'
There is a lot of 'not been there' 'not done that' 'won't do that so not relevant'
Scorpion,
I do, and PN is right.
I have had the recent good fortune to serve at a stn where SLOps was type-qualified aircrew from the resident aircraft type. He acted as a magnificent sh*t-filter for the sqns and things like stats, tasking, etc were all dealt with by his office without much involvement from the flying units. By contrast, on several other postings, SLOps or the equivalent has been run by the Flt Ops branch; in my experience these individuals have not actually filtered anything out and basically forward everything to the sqns for answers / action. Pointless.
I do, and PN is right.
I have had the recent good fortune to serve at a stn where SLOps was type-qualified aircrew from the resident aircraft type. He acted as a magnificent sh*t-filter for the sqns and things like stats, tasking, etc were all dealt with by his office without much involvement from the flying units. By contrast, on several other postings, SLOps or the equivalent has been run by the Flt Ops branch; in my experience these individuals have not actually filtered anything out and basically forward everything to the sqns for answers / action. Pointless.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
SD, no.
I was not quite clear in what I meant. It was that when the aircraft was operating in an area different from where the FO was actually operating. I did not mean in-theatre but more where the aircraft was operating away from home base, say 200-300 miles or more. Spatial geography might be one way of putting it.
To give an example, and the snr Ops O at the time was a pilot, the weather was getting rapidly worse than the TAFs and airfields were going black almost as fast as we could ring them. Our one aircraft airborne was 3 hours from base and a flight to base then diversion could have taken 5 hours. We needed to recall the aircraft before we had got a diversion sorted.
Action was needed well before eyes were dotted etc. An unaware FO would have not had a clue. That is not to say one that was top notch could not have done it.
Equally I was being general. Note the word CAN and not ARE.
I am not sure whether you are for or against Flt Ops.
I was not quite clear in what I meant. It was that when the aircraft was operating in an area different from where the FO was actually operating. I did not mean in-theatre but more where the aircraft was operating away from home base, say 200-300 miles or more. Spatial geography might be one way of putting it.
To give an example, and the snr Ops O at the time was a pilot, the weather was getting rapidly worse than the TAFs and airfields were going black almost as fast as we could ring them. Our one aircraft airborne was 3 hours from base and a flight to base then diversion could have taken 5 hours. We needed to recall the aircraft before we had got a diversion sorted.
Action was needed well before eyes were dotted etc. An unaware FO would have not had a clue. That is not to say one that was top notch could not have done it.
Equally I was being general. Note the word CAN and not ARE.
I am not sure whether you are for or against Flt Ops.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The real world
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Party Animal , not strictly true, those on AFPS 75 taking voluntary or compulsary redundancy will be entitled upto 9 months pay but only if they have served more than 16yrs (Commisioned) or 18 yrs (enlisted) reckonable service, if they have less than 3 years left to IP point the package goes down accordingly, 6 months for two yrs, 3 months for l year etc.
Of course most of those with 3 yrs or less won't be in the bracket for redundancy and will instead probably just be culled under natural wastage.
Of course most of those with 3 yrs or less won't be in the bracket for redundancy and will instead probably just be culled under natural wastage.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brevet good, no brevet bad or as Orwell put it; four legs good, two legs bad. A bit of a generalisation but one that many either allude to or state outright with regard to ops jobs in the RAF. Not all aircrew are unstinting professionals and not all OpsOs are dithering buffoons, most of both inhabit the area between both ends of the capabilty spectrum.
Forgive me for using myself as an example, it is appropriate as I am not untypical of my peers. Having been SLOPs at an MOB, whilst not wishing to get into an internet willy-waving contest when nobody knows my bona fides, I do take exception to the suggestion that I was unlikely to effectively undertake the role by dint of not being aircrew Of greater importance than what I knew was my ability to recognise what I didn't know and in those situations, as when anybody else needed specialist advice, I could turn to any number of SMEs on the stn when necessary. If my competence had been in question then the Staish wouldn't have let me anywhere near the A/OC Ops role which I fulfilled for varying periods over a considerable proportion of my tour.
I'm as aware as anyone of some of the instances when the performance of some individuals within my branch has been less than spectacular but those occasions are far less common than some people, for whatever reason, would lead us to believe.
I'm not "aircrew lite" and I don't pretend to be and that's not what I'm employed to be. I'm an ops spt specialist and after 12 years at the job working across a variety of platforms both in the UK and deployed on operations even I have managed to get pretty good at it. I have no doubt that if you put a pilot or a nav into my job then there are areas of it in which he or she would have greater knowledge than I but equally there are areas which they will have never encountered before which I treat as second nature. The question is whether over the totality of the job the high-quality, experienced aircrew officer would outperform the equally high quality and experienced Flt Ops Officer in an ops spt role? Even if that contest were to prove a draw then in the current economic climate the Flt Ops Officer would possibly win on a financial TKO.
As I have said before, if your OpsO isn't up to muster then address the issue as appropriate. A little advice, guidance and encouragement or chastising as appropriate will be far more beneficial to both the individual and the service than you just walking away and having a moan to you mates later on.
MB
Forgive me for using myself as an example, it is appropriate as I am not untypical of my peers. Having been SLOPs at an MOB, whilst not wishing to get into an internet willy-waving contest when nobody knows my bona fides, I do take exception to the suggestion that I was unlikely to effectively undertake the role by dint of not being aircrew Of greater importance than what I knew was my ability to recognise what I didn't know and in those situations, as when anybody else needed specialist advice, I could turn to any number of SMEs on the stn when necessary. If my competence had been in question then the Staish wouldn't have let me anywhere near the A/OC Ops role which I fulfilled for varying periods over a considerable proportion of my tour.
I'm as aware as anyone of some of the instances when the performance of some individuals within my branch has been less than spectacular but those occasions are far less common than some people, for whatever reason, would lead us to believe.
I'm not "aircrew lite" and I don't pretend to be and that's not what I'm employed to be. I'm an ops spt specialist and after 12 years at the job working across a variety of platforms both in the UK and deployed on operations even I have managed to get pretty good at it. I have no doubt that if you put a pilot or a nav into my job then there are areas of it in which he or she would have greater knowledge than I but equally there are areas which they will have never encountered before which I treat as second nature. The question is whether over the totality of the job the high-quality, experienced aircrew officer would outperform the equally high quality and experienced Flt Ops Officer in an ops spt role? Even if that contest were to prove a draw then in the current economic climate the Flt Ops Officer would possibly win on a financial TKO.
As I have said before, if your OpsO isn't up to muster then address the issue as appropriate. A little advice, guidance and encouragement or chastising as appropriate will be far more beneficial to both the individual and the service than you just walking away and having a moan to you mates later on.
MB
Quite right Jayand - I was generalising.
But here's an open question that I haven't heard much about. The details quote tax free pay which I assume includes FP? Is this a correct assumption?
But here's an open question that I haven't heard much about. The details quote tax free pay which I assume includes FP? Is this a correct assumption?
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
mutty, of course. They will still be on the UE and as redundancy has yet to be announced or posted to non-flying appointments thenthey are still entitled to flying pay.
When they are appointed to ground posts as some here suggest, and IMHO quite likely for some, they will continue, as per the rules, to draw flying pay. Only if they subsequently opt to change branches or opt for non-flying appointments would they lose the pay. The rules are quite clear, the application of those rules is however flexible I believe.
As for PA, I don't know but the same I guess.
When they are appointed to ground posts as some here suggest, and IMHO quite likely for some, they will continue, as per the rules, to draw flying pay. Only if they subsequently opt to change branches or opt for non-flying appointments would they lose the pay. The rules are quite clear, the application of those rules is however flexible I believe.
As for PA, I don't know but the same I guess.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Going deeper underground
Age: 55
Posts: 332
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MUtty - it is worse than that. The whole airfield, including associated manpower and equipment, is still up and running at ISK (and costing money) even though they have no aeroplanes.
Last edited by orgASMic; 2nd Dec 2010 at 13:53. Reason: grammar
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...which is why the personnel should be thinned out to absolute minimum manning to maintain the most basic of an infastructure until the future of ISK is decided. Those not doing anything should be straight on a proper Op tour. Not any of this 2 month, 4 month, 3 weeks rubbish. I do not for a second doubt that MR2 crews have been very busy in the last few years but so has everyone else.
Families - stag on and do what others have been doing for years until that future is fully worked out. Other halves - start coming up with those plans about schools and job like everyone else has to every 2 or 3 years.
There is no profit making organisation in the world that would carry on like this, including putting up with some of the bleating on this and other WSOp threads about being special, and there is no reason why those at ISK are any different.
Families - stag on and do what others have been doing for years until that future is fully worked out. Other halves - start coming up with those plans about schools and job like everyone else has to every 2 or 3 years.
There is no profit making organisation in the world that would carry on like this, including putting up with some of the bleating on this and other WSOp threads about being special, and there is no reason why those at ISK are any different.