Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Shoestring AT

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 17th Aug 2011, 10:13
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: between the M6 and M25
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Shoestring AT

Why can't the RAF admit we do not have the resources to operate a fully functioning AT fleet?

- PVRs, high proportion of the experienced guys on 216 and C130 fleets are leaving; plus others I am sure (no matter what spin Manning decide to place on it).

- BZN will not be able to handle our assets properly for at least 2-4 years IMO until the 10 and Tri* go. Too many aircraft types and noise complaints, not enough space, car parking, SFA, SLA with also 'a pause in the modernisation' (2011DIB/73) of living accommodation.

- Not enough Simulator capacity for the C130 fleet, down to one DMS for the foreseeable future. Options being discussed to borrow / buy Sim slots from other countries. How about we redefine what is important, must we keep all these BCRs. This at a time when we are thinking of making all our C130 crews TacAT qualified out of the box.

- With current Ops, not enough C130J aircraft; are we seriously going to borrow USAFE Ramstein Js for our crews to fly? Another lacklustre planning event. Last minute, make it work type leadership. We instead should be downgrading our capability, 'no we cannot support these current Ops'. It takes those in the senior roles – Mr Stamp et al to voice their concerns instead of looking after No. 1. Maybe then the government will take note and alter its foreign policy. Is 2014 too late to be reducing our forces in OEF?

- Not enough flying jobs for our pilots, so people are being forced into Grd jobs, delayed or cancelled Captaincy courses. Sending aircrew overseas to in essence work for free is one way of dealing with it. Possibility of x4 C130J Captains to Canada for instance. Instead we should be opening the redundancy program to include pilots and less rigid limits on other aircrew trades. Chance to get rid of some of the dead wood maybe, the force would benefit as a result. Do not penalise those who want to stay.

Please discuss…
JliderPilot is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2011, 11:37
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Among these dark Satanic mills
Posts: 1,197
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Chance to get rid of some of the dead wood maybe, the force would benefit as a result. Do not penalise those who want to stay.
But as so many have said already, it doesn't work like that - the dead wood usually knows it's dead (ie couldn't easily find work outside) therefore manages to dodge being got rid of with various made-up sob stories or threats, and it's the good people who would apply for redundancy and pass Go collecting £200 on their way out to pastures greener!

One of the big problems facing the RAF is that the small proportion of lazy/jack individuals are allowed to get away with flagrant slacking due to spineless management, and the hard-working majority are increasingly deciding that there's no point going the extra mile to help the Service as there is no incentive for doing so other than personal pride (and loyalty to a Service which doesn't reciprocate), and equally no penalty, financial or disciplinary, for joining the ranks of the dead wood.
TorqueOfTheDevil is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.