Future Force Structure
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wrath,
The RAF system used to be more complicated than that - maybe it still is. The RAF system was based on things like the following: core working day, entitled training time, duty time, leave time, sickness time etc etc. it is why an RAF sqn always seemed over-manned compared to an RN sqn and why there were always more RAF people on training courses than the RN - training time etc was built into the "white ticket" calculation whereas in the RN it wasn't/isn't. RN manning is based around the "watch and station bill" and the ability to man 2 defence watches at sea - core working day etc did not come into it.
Re NSW and 6 month tours....if they were under RN control they would have done, but they were operating an RAF roulement. The issue above is also why 800 and 801 struggled to achieve full manning and hence formation - the RAF insisted on areas of manning on sqqns that the RN structure did not support - QFIs being a classic example.
Odigron,
You may not agree with the RN system but the facts speak for themselves...the RN is the leanest manned Service and when the financial stops are visible then what is the case for the RAF system of manning. It is interesting that RN PVR rates were always amongst the lowest in the 3 Services so the 1 in 3 system can't be that bad.
The RAF system used to be more complicated than that - maybe it still is. The RAF system was based on things like the following: core working day, entitled training time, duty time, leave time, sickness time etc etc. it is why an RAF sqn always seemed over-manned compared to an RN sqn and why there were always more RAF people on training courses than the RN - training time etc was built into the "white ticket" calculation whereas in the RN it wasn't/isn't. RN manning is based around the "watch and station bill" and the ability to man 2 defence watches at sea - core working day etc did not come into it.
Re NSW and 6 month tours....if they were under RN control they would have done, but they were operating an RAF roulement. The issue above is also why 800 and 801 struggled to achieve full manning and hence formation - the RAF insisted on areas of manning on sqqns that the RN structure did not support - QFIs being a classic example.
Odigron,
You may not agree with the RN system but the facts speak for themselves...the RN is the leanest manned Service and when the financial stops are visible then what is the case for the RAF system of manning. It is interesting that RN PVR rates were always amongst the lowest in the 3 Services so the 1 in 3 system can't be that bad.
Thanks Bismarck - of course the true formula for working out RAF manning is deliberately complicated in order to cause confusion amongst the RN and Army!
The calculations used even differ, within the RAF, between the FJ and AT fleets - which is fine until you have to explain them to your 1* dyed in the wool light blue wearing joint force helicopter chap ...
The calculations used even differ, within the RAF, between the FJ and AT fleets - which is fine until you have to explain them to your 1* dyed in the wool light blue wearing joint force helicopter chap ...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: England
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO anyone who thinks running a long-term 1 in 3 deployment plot is a good way of looking after the well-being of our people has either never worked such a plot, or has no real interest in a family life. That's not to say I don't have the utmost respect for those personnel of all 3 Services who are working such plots.
As for the Falkands, RAF officers in ground tours do do six month tours (I've done one) for continuity reasons. There are good Service reasons why SAR aircrew do not do six month tours; in addition it is far better for individuals - let's not screw people if we don't have to!!!
As for the Falkands, RAF officers in ground tours do do six month tours (I've done one) for continuity reasons. There are good Service reasons why SAR aircrew do not do six month tours; in addition it is far better for individuals - let's not screw people if we don't have to!!!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Odigron,
My piece is written in the past tense. Also, I am not sure whether current stats are particularly relevant to a steady state, non redundancy, situation.
By the by, I could not find any PVR stats in the DASA tables. can you provide a link? All I could see were overall outflow rates the majority of which will be normal leavers at the end of their commissions/service.
My piece is written in the past tense. Also, I am not sure whether current stats are particularly relevant to a steady state, non redundancy, situation.
By the by, I could not find any PVR stats in the DASA tables. can you provide a link? All I could see were overall outflow rates the majority of which will be normal leavers at the end of their commissions/service.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Age: 56
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bis,
I can't see any PVR stats on the DASA site either. However, the site does say that 'Voluntary Outflow is defined as all exits from trained UK Regular Forces which are voluntarily generated by the individual before the end of their agreed engagement or commission period.' I guess that's close to PVR.
The stats back to 2006 all show RN Voluntary Outflow is higher than RAF. I can't seem to access stats before that. Nonetheless, I think they could be considered relevant.
I can't see any PVR stats on the DASA site either. However, the site does say that 'Voluntary Outflow is defined as all exits from trained UK Regular Forces which are voluntarily generated by the individual before the end of their agreed engagement or commission period.' I guess that's close to PVR.
The stats back to 2006 all show RN Voluntary Outflow is higher than RAF. I can't seem to access stats before that. Nonetheless, I think they could be considered relevant.
The logistic requirements for swapping deployed sqns is minimal - a single movement of 100-200 pers being the sum total for a formed unit move such as practised by Tornado sqns, or a steady drip-feed for non-formed deployments such as the FI. The aircraft, tools and spares all remain in situ. That small logistic requirement is a small price to pay for the goodwill of our people.
I think that 4 months is already too long for some kinds of deployment. Deployed operations will only ever involve part of the skill-set for which a sqn trains - FJ sqns in Afghanistan, for example, will not get any routine low-flying, radar SAM evasion or air-to-air work for the whole time they are deployed, and the rate of weapons employment is low with a narrow range of options available. In-theatre training is impossible, with the sole exception of a very limited strafe facility at the KAF range. After months of this, skill fade is a serious issue - would you like to be a JTAC danger-close to a target being strafed by a pilot who hasn't done a pass in 6 months? You can mitigate this to an extent by rotations for simulator training in the UK - but then you might as well rotate sqns instead. Afterwards, sqns need a significant period of consolidation to recover other skills. 6 months would make this problem even worse than it already is.
The standard TELIC det for the Tornado force was 8 weeks per squadron. After such a brief hiatus in normal sqn activity, training for contingency roles could easily pick up where it had left off. Not the case any more, where the longer dets (with their associated extended post-op leave) come to define the whole year - particularly when the amount of pre-deployment bo**ocks now adds up to about 2 weeks of no-fly!
Many of us would not have joined the RAF had routine 6-month deployments been part of the deal; those who chose to join the RN did so in full knowledge that they would be away for a significant proportion of their time. There are upsides to the RN lifestyle - a degree of geographic stability for families for one, which is emphatically NOT the case in the RAF. Our downside is a 2 - 3 year posting cycle to locations in all corners of the UK, and postings between front-line / training / staff tours virtually always require a move. It looks like the Army will be joining the RAF in this lifestyle as they take over our old airfields!
I think that 4 months is already too long for some kinds of deployment. Deployed operations will only ever involve part of the skill-set for which a sqn trains - FJ sqns in Afghanistan, for example, will not get any routine low-flying, radar SAM evasion or air-to-air work for the whole time they are deployed, and the rate of weapons employment is low with a narrow range of options available. In-theatre training is impossible, with the sole exception of a very limited strafe facility at the KAF range. After months of this, skill fade is a serious issue - would you like to be a JTAC danger-close to a target being strafed by a pilot who hasn't done a pass in 6 months? You can mitigate this to an extent by rotations for simulator training in the UK - but then you might as well rotate sqns instead. Afterwards, sqns need a significant period of consolidation to recover other skills. 6 months would make this problem even worse than it already is.
The standard TELIC det for the Tornado force was 8 weeks per squadron. After such a brief hiatus in normal sqn activity, training for contingency roles could easily pick up where it had left off. Not the case any more, where the longer dets (with their associated extended post-op leave) come to define the whole year - particularly when the amount of pre-deployment bo**ocks now adds up to about 2 weeks of no-fly!
Many of us would not have joined the RAF had routine 6-month deployments been part of the deal; those who chose to join the RN did so in full knowledge that they would be away for a significant proportion of their time. There are upsides to the RN lifestyle - a degree of geographic stability for families for one, which is emphatically NOT the case in the RAF. Our downside is a 2 - 3 year posting cycle to locations in all corners of the UK, and postings between front-line / training / staff tours virtually always require a move. It looks like the Army will be joining the RAF in this lifestyle as they take over our old airfields!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Jungle
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bissy,
I don't see what is wrong with the RAF system of using many different factors in calculating manning on the sqn; surely core day, sickness, leave and so on provide a far more realistic plot. Perhaps you can view it as the RN have got it wrong and they are not being realistic with their figures/assumptions and, thus, screwing over their own?
Just a thought.
I don't see what is wrong with the RAF system of using many different factors in calculating manning on the sqn; surely core day, sickness, leave and so on provide a far more realistic plot. Perhaps you can view it as the RN have got it wrong and they are not being realistic with their figures/assumptions and, thus, screwing over their own?
Just a thought.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are upsides to the RN lifestyle - a degree of geographic stability for families for one,
I did say a degree of stability. Yes, there are some RN jobs all over the country but the overwhelming majority are in the south. There is no one area of the UK that someone in the RAF can settle in and expect to spend the majority of their career within an hour or two's drive. Unless you work on the transport fleet!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Different ships, different cap tallies.
Bismark;
Send a UK SAR crew to the FI for 6 months and all SAR orientated currency starts to fall away. Yes, you can work 24 on, 24 off, for 6 months with your two 4 man crews, (with the regular incursions into your 24 off) but it would become debilitating after a very short period. I've done it loads of times (24 on/off, that is).
The training required to recover UK flying awareness after 6 months away would be a significant cost, and, as there is a paucity of crews, a 6 week rotation is actually cost effective in returning a crew as quickly as possible back to UK SAROp standard, and maintain the expertise that the UK needs.
The deployed time for a SAR crew to the FI is a balance; to retain optimum skills at UK and MPA, with minimum time (and cost) to get back online, and do it safely.
Different ships, different cap tallies. When the RN deploy for 6 months, they don't go and do another 6 monther on return to the UK. The tightly manned UKSARF (RN/RAF/CG) is watchon-stopon, all the time.
In summary; Manpower available (Cost), Maintaining skillset (Cost), Flight Safety (....).
It has just been reported that PW is going to the FIs for 6 weeks rotation - what does such a short rotation cost? Why not 6 months rotation like the RN do down there.
The training required to recover UK flying awareness after 6 months away would be a significant cost, and, as there is a paucity of crews, a 6 week rotation is actually cost effective in returning a crew as quickly as possible back to UK SAROp standard, and maintain the expertise that the UK needs.
The deployed time for a SAR crew to the FI is a balance; to retain optimum skills at UK and MPA, with minimum time (and cost) to get back online, and do it safely.
Different ships, different cap tallies. When the RN deploy for 6 months, they don't go and do another 6 monther on return to the UK. The tightly manned UKSARF (RN/RAF/CG) is watchon-stopon, all the time.
In summary; Manpower available (Cost), Maintaining skillset (Cost), Flight Safety (....).
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The tightly manned UKSARF (RN/RAF/CG) is watchon-stopon, all the time.
My neighbour's son is in the RN on a running warship and he has hardly been at home all year - an 8 month deployment, short leave and maintenance on return (6 weeks), then back to sea for 5 weeks exercises with France etc, off to Libya on the gun-line, return and now working up for the next 6 monther at Christmas. He loves it - mainly because he is saving loads of dosh for a house and the ship's morale is sky high.
EASY, If a survey was done I would be interested to know what percentage of staff at Lossie have spent their career to the N of Aviemore or in the Lincoln clutch, or at Benson/Odiham.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Age: 56
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once again Bis, I agree with somethings that you say, but disagree with others.
I have no difficulty accepting that your neighbour's son loves all the time at sea. Nearly all young service personnel I have met love the time away in the beginning. But how long will he love it for? Another 5 years, 10 years, more? People's circumstances change, they get married, they have children and their love of spending time away can often dwindle.
I do have sympathy with your outrage at the comparison between RN ship deployment and SARF deployments. That said, I also suspect that an RN deployment is rather 'cushier' than most 6 month army deployments. You are rightly proud of your service/former service, but let's not get into the compair and contrast argument, each service does things in a different way for good reasons. Something's the RN does are better than the Army, some are not.
I have no difficulty accepting that your neighbour's son loves all the time at sea. Nearly all young service personnel I have met love the time away in the beginning. But how long will he love it for? Another 5 years, 10 years, more? People's circumstances change, they get married, they have children and their love of spending time away can often dwindle.
I do have sympathy with your outrage at the comparison between RN ship deployment and SARF deployments. That said, I also suspect that an RN deployment is rather 'cushier' than most 6 month army deployments. You are rightly proud of your service/former service, but let's not get into the compair and contrast argument, each service does things in a different way for good reasons. Something's the RN does are better than the Army, some are not.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The other thing you chaps need to realise is that the rotary (post Afgh) and F35/F18 guys are going to spend a lot of time at sea - especially the latter as "cats and traps" skills need loads of practice.
Having read PPRrune for a while a common (and reasonable) concern is the lack of flying hours. If there are only a small amount of flying hours per month how many of these hours would be needed just to maintain cat-n-trap currency rather than focussing on the other skills that are required - low-level, CAS, ACM, etc? (Obviously, no matter what the training mission, you've got to get back on the deck at the end)
Along these lines there's an old jibe from the USAF towards the USN about how the USN would be the clear winners in any war providing that it was fought on the basis of being able to land on a carrier.
Given the likelihood that flying hours won't be going up in the future, is it a cost effective use of what flying hours there are to spend them on maintaining cat-n-trap currency?
Originally Posted by Odigron
...I have no difficulty accepting that your neighbour's son loves all the time at sea. Nearly all young service personnel I have met love the time away in the beginning. But how long will he love it for? Another 5 years, 10 years, more? People's circumstances change, they get married, they have children and their love of spending time away can often dwindle...
As for:
...I also suspect that an RN deployment is rather 'cushier' than most 6 month army deployments...
This is the Trafalgar Class SSN Turbulent which is currently away for 10 months. When Triumph returns next year, she’ll have been away for 13 of the previous 17 months. Their sister boat Tireless completed a ten-month deployment in the spring.
Sometimes, the differences in the services, and their ethos, are really laid bare.