Will Puma Survive?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok-let's stop it please!
So why are we raising this issue?
Is it adding any value to Defence, the RAF or these threads?
Puma will add value to the Army, and of course it should have been saved from HMT's knife as the next conflict will require air mobility, just as the last conflicts have shown us what happens if we do not have enough helicopters.
As to Merlin going to the Fisheads, get over it and just because our Airships and Blimps have been backward in planning the outflow of our Merlin crews to other cockpits we cannot blame the Fisheads as they would ideally have had their FASH, SABR or whatever it was called many years ago. We got our Wessex replacement they got an extension of service to the Sea King.
There have been many recent studies on the cost of Merlin transition and if for one moment Army thought they could save a Regiment or two by keeping us in Merlin and stopping transition (or by making a Joint Force) they would have done it. Don't forget Army pay for us and also CHF.
The cost of Merlin transition has been proven to be not significant if the UK wants an amphibious capability and at the last SDSR the current Prime Minister stated he did want an amphibious capability which has been articulated in recent policy and doctrine documents. As discussed in earlier threads I wouldn't be surprised if there were numerous SDSR 'U turns', but I personally think a national amphibious capability is here to stay, therefore so is CHF and Merlin marinisation. If HMG do decide that a future amphibious capability is not required or is too expensive then with carriers not being operational for 10 years plus what will the RN do?
When will the bitter single Service focused people on this thread understand that the cost of ship optimising Merlin is minuscule compared to the overall mid life upgrade for obsolescence-whichever Service flys Merlin it will need investment from MOD and HMT. I would like to wager that those that espouse that the mighty Chinook can do all amphibious stuff haven't actually served on a busy deck or operation for any period of time (e.g. Al Faw), if they had then they might not be so confident in their assumptions. Same goes for Puma 2, if we are seriously planning on routinely operating Puma2 at sea, then I really hope that the LEP includes a marinisation element. One or 2 non marinised aircraft (say AH and CH47) can be worked around and absorbed into an embarked deployment by a majority of marinised aircraft, but if all embarked aircraft are not marinised then this presents a different dynamic, not just from an operating perspective, but I would also suggest overall risk/safety?
And that is just the equipment, what we forget is that if Merlin did not go to the Fisheads and CHF was absorbed into us or the Army, are we in light blue really going to accept a career profile (for all ranks) that includes many months at sea in order to run future ship's air ops, engineering teams, deck marshallers, fire fighters, etc etc? The RN grows those personnel (not just aircrew) through a career profile that takes time at sea as the norm. I don't think that many of us either joined up or would accept in the future regular 6 month deployments at sea. I know that the first time I found it interesting, but by the second time I and Mrs MM4 were less than impressed.
I do find it amazing (worrying) that as soon as we lose a capability/cockpit seats (through no fault or single Service agendas by the Fisheads-but due to HMG and VCDS decisions/direction) that we then start a campaign of negative PR and information saying the Merlin is too costly or not very capable.
There is no money for Blackhawks, or NH90 or more CH47 or any other new helicopter. I am pretty convinced that DE&S will only accept a core rotary programme of Apache, Chinook, Merlin, Wildcat and Puma. Any helicopter that maintains air mobility and lift for our troops must surely be a good thing, not single Service agendas to try and get the Fisheads out of Merlin by 'eating our own' and trying to scrap Merlin in total.
Comes across as very bitter and twisted.
I think I know why, and it could be because our hierarchy may not have been honest with us until recently and might have created the impression that the Merlin transition was not really going to happen. We all understand that alegedly our senior leadership has tried every trick in the book to not only keep Puma, but also prevent Merlin from going to the Fisheads.
This is the heart of the problem as if we had started honest and open planning for a Merlin transition as part of a wider JHC plan with other transitions then we would not be in the position that we are today where people have only just realised that they will be moving on and it will not be through a career path in the Merlin Force in the long term.
In summary Puma is cost effective and will be in much demand by troops for future conflicts, the cost of Merlin transition is neglible, and be careful if CHF does go as there are many non-flying aviation tied sea jobs just waiting for us if it does, but the bottom line is cutting helicopters of any type or Service is not going to assist future conflicts and the troops we serve.
Can we please stop this very damaging bickering. If we are too busy fighting and focussing on each other then not only will we be disjointed and dislocated for the next conflict, but we will probably miss the real threat which is the next SDSR.
Is it adding any value to Defence, the RAF or these threads?
Puma will add value to the Army, and of course it should have been saved from HMT's knife as the next conflict will require air mobility, just as the last conflicts have shown us what happens if we do not have enough helicopters.
As to Merlin going to the Fisheads, get over it and just because our Airships and Blimps have been backward in planning the outflow of our Merlin crews to other cockpits we cannot blame the Fisheads as they would ideally have had their FASH, SABR or whatever it was called many years ago. We got our Wessex replacement they got an extension of service to the Sea King.
There have been many recent studies on the cost of Merlin transition and if for one moment Army thought they could save a Regiment or two by keeping us in Merlin and stopping transition (or by making a Joint Force) they would have done it. Don't forget Army pay for us and also CHF.
The cost of Merlin transition has been proven to be not significant if the UK wants an amphibious capability and at the last SDSR the current Prime Minister stated he did want an amphibious capability which has been articulated in recent policy and doctrine documents. As discussed in earlier threads I wouldn't be surprised if there were numerous SDSR 'U turns', but I personally think a national amphibious capability is here to stay, therefore so is CHF and Merlin marinisation. If HMG do decide that a future amphibious capability is not required or is too expensive then with carriers not being operational for 10 years plus what will the RN do?
When will the bitter single Service focused people on this thread understand that the cost of ship optimising Merlin is minuscule compared to the overall mid life upgrade for obsolescence-whichever Service flys Merlin it will need investment from MOD and HMT. I would like to wager that those that espouse that the mighty Chinook can do all amphibious stuff haven't actually served on a busy deck or operation for any period of time (e.g. Al Faw), if they had then they might not be so confident in their assumptions. Same goes for Puma 2, if we are seriously planning on routinely operating Puma2 at sea, then I really hope that the LEP includes a marinisation element. One or 2 non marinised aircraft (say AH and CH47) can be worked around and absorbed into an embarked deployment by a majority of marinised aircraft, but if all embarked aircraft are not marinised then this presents a different dynamic, not just from an operating perspective, but I would also suggest overall risk/safety?
And that is just the equipment, what we forget is that if Merlin did not go to the Fisheads and CHF was absorbed into us or the Army, are we in light blue really going to accept a career profile (for all ranks) that includes many months at sea in order to run future ship's air ops, engineering teams, deck marshallers, fire fighters, etc etc? The RN grows those personnel (not just aircrew) through a career profile that takes time at sea as the norm. I don't think that many of us either joined up or would accept in the future regular 6 month deployments at sea. I know that the first time I found it interesting, but by the second time I and Mrs MM4 were less than impressed.
I do find it amazing (worrying) that as soon as we lose a capability/cockpit seats (through no fault or single Service agendas by the Fisheads-but due to HMG and VCDS decisions/direction) that we then start a campaign of negative PR and information saying the Merlin is too costly or not very capable.
There is no money for Blackhawks, or NH90 or more CH47 or any other new helicopter. I am pretty convinced that DE&S will only accept a core rotary programme of Apache, Chinook, Merlin, Wildcat and Puma. Any helicopter that maintains air mobility and lift for our troops must surely be a good thing, not single Service agendas to try and get the Fisheads out of Merlin by 'eating our own' and trying to scrap Merlin in total.
Comes across as very bitter and twisted.
I think I know why, and it could be because our hierarchy may not have been honest with us until recently and might have created the impression that the Merlin transition was not really going to happen. We all understand that alegedly our senior leadership has tried every trick in the book to not only keep Puma, but also prevent Merlin from going to the Fisheads.
This is the heart of the problem as if we had started honest and open planning for a Merlin transition as part of a wider JHC plan with other transitions then we would not be in the position that we are today where people have only just realised that they will be moving on and it will not be through a career path in the Merlin Force in the long term.
In summary Puma is cost effective and will be in much demand by troops for future conflicts, the cost of Merlin transition is neglible, and be careful if CHF does go as there are many non-flying aviation tied sea jobs just waiting for us if it does, but the bottom line is cutting helicopters of any type or Service is not going to assist future conflicts and the troops we serve.
Can we please stop this very damaging bickering. If we are too busy fighting and focussing on each other then not only will we be disjointed and dislocated for the next conflict, but we will probably miss the real threat which is the next SDSR.
Last edited by MaroonMan4; 6th Apr 2012 at 07:22.
When did anyone in CHF last spend six months at sea?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Proone,
I am not looking at today, yesterday or even the last 10 years-but some of us were around before Iraq and Afghan when we embarked with the Fisheads for long periods of time. With Bosnia being the focus in the late 90s our deployments were predominantly to the Med, but who knows where they will want to park their '65,000 tonnes of diplomacy' in the coming years.
Looking to a future beyond Afghan I reckon that politicians and senior officers alike are going to want to see their lovely big carriers do 'something' -and without any jets for quite a while that something will be amphibious which means you and me-which doesn't exactly fill me with much joy.
And as I have tried to highlight it is not just aircrew that make an amphibious capability, there are a whole load of aviation, engineering, fire fighting tied jobs that have certainly seen CHF personnel deployed for 6 months and quite frankly not the kind of jobs that I want to be doing and not what I joined up for.
It's not where we have been, it is where we are going that worries me!
I am not looking at today, yesterday or even the last 10 years-but some of us were around before Iraq and Afghan when we embarked with the Fisheads for long periods of time. With Bosnia being the focus in the late 90s our deployments were predominantly to the Med, but who knows where they will want to park their '65,000 tonnes of diplomacy' in the coming years.
Looking to a future beyond Afghan I reckon that politicians and senior officers alike are going to want to see their lovely big carriers do 'something' -and without any jets for quite a while that something will be amphibious which means you and me-which doesn't exactly fill me with much joy.
And as I have tried to highlight it is not just aircrew that make an amphibious capability, there are a whole load of aviation, engineering, fire fighting tied jobs that have certainly seen CHF personnel deployed for 6 months and quite frankly not the kind of jobs that I want to be doing and not what I joined up for.
It's not where we have been, it is where we are going that worries me!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MaroonMan4 - thanks for what I think is possibly the most sensible post I've seen on this thread for some considerable time!
A couple of observations...
- The last time OCEAN deployed, she left Guzz in Mar/Apr 2011 and returned in December. That was a little over 7 months and there were CHF aircraft and personnel on board for most of it.
- The AURIGA deployment in 2010 saw SK and Lynx embark on OCEAN, head to the East coast of the States and conduct a LitM exercise, before heading down south for a short trip to the South Atlantic and returning via West Africa.
- During the TAURUS trip in 2009, we had Lynx embarked for the whole trip, departing in Feb and returning in Aug, just under six months.
In all cases, there were personnel from CHF who did the whole of the trips on board. Admittedly, some of the crews and maintainers for the aircraft weren't on board throughout every deployment and there were roulements, but we had the capability available. The SKs were on board for some of the trips, but the roulement plots for Afghanistan would have been affected if we'd kept the Kings on board all the time, so we didn't. One SK Flight embarked three or four weeks after they got back from Afghanistan last year, spent nearly two months away in the Med and then came back to VL to work up before deploying to Afghanistan in the Autumn. Over the previous 24 months, they'd done three tours in Afghanistan (including Christmas) and had embarked for two deployments of two or three months in between each. I know we're all working hard, but keeping LitM going isn't as simple as a couple of DLs every few months!
Happy Easter to everyone, hope those in dusty places stay safe and hope that the CH boys in Yuma are all OK, if a little shaken up.
A couple of observations...
- The last time OCEAN deployed, she left Guzz in Mar/Apr 2011 and returned in December. That was a little over 7 months and there were CHF aircraft and personnel on board for most of it.
- The AURIGA deployment in 2010 saw SK and Lynx embark on OCEAN, head to the East coast of the States and conduct a LitM exercise, before heading down south for a short trip to the South Atlantic and returning via West Africa.
- During the TAURUS trip in 2009, we had Lynx embarked for the whole trip, departing in Feb and returning in Aug, just under six months.
In all cases, there were personnel from CHF who did the whole of the trips on board. Admittedly, some of the crews and maintainers for the aircraft weren't on board throughout every deployment and there were roulements, but we had the capability available. The SKs were on board for some of the trips, but the roulement plots for Afghanistan would have been affected if we'd kept the Kings on board all the time, so we didn't. One SK Flight embarked three or four weeks after they got back from Afghanistan last year, spent nearly two months away in the Med and then came back to VL to work up before deploying to Afghanistan in the Autumn. Over the previous 24 months, they'd done three tours in Afghanistan (including Christmas) and had embarked for two deployments of two or three months in between each. I know we're all working hard, but keeping LitM going isn't as simple as a couple of DLs every few months!
Happy Easter to everyone, hope those in dusty places stay safe and hope that the CH boys in Yuma are all OK, if a little shaken up.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Surrey, UK
Age: 70
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CHF RFA detachments
When did anyone in CHF last spend six months at sea?
Please correct me if this no longer applies but I was under the impression that the CHF regularly provided long term detachments to the RFAs.
Please correct me if this no longer applies but I was under the impression that the CHF regularly provided long term detachments to the RFAs.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Support to the RFA aviation departments is provided by the Maritime Aviation Support Force based at Culdrose.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Snafu,
I see the detail is in the wording and is the 'Support staff' a bunch of civilians that are posted to ships as and when required and what about the aircrew?
If the support staff are civilians then where is that line being drawn regarding the manning of front line warships?
The site lists these ships as having this type of support:
HMS Ocean, HMS Chatham, HMS Ark Royal
Are both Chatham and Ark Royal still in commission and why not civilianize the rest of the ship's company aboard that other warship, why be selective?
Apologies for thread drift but.......... ouch!!
I see the detail is in the wording and is the 'Support staff' a bunch of civilians that are posted to ships as and when required and what about the aircrew?
If the support staff are civilians then where is that line being drawn regarding the manning of front line warships?
The site lists these ships as having this type of support:
HMS Ocean, HMS Chatham, HMS Ark Royal
Are both Chatham and Ark Royal still in commission and why not civilianize the rest of the ship's company aboard that other warship, why be selective?
Apologies for thread drift but.......... ouch!!
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Tourist,
Good point and hopefully it is my interpretation that has allowed me to jump to the wrong assumption
If they are service personnel it reads like they are based shore side and get 'parachuted' onto a ship as and when required?
I guess I am asking questions as opposed to making a statement and no doubt just like your very good self, you can see the problems of not having the so called 'support staff' as part of a ship's company.
I can think of any number of roles an Aircraft Handler might have to perform other than working on aircraft but if they are posted in as support to the embarked squadron, would they then refuse to be a part of a Boarding Party or help ashore to offer assistance toward a civil disaster or quell a civil uprising?? What about the more mundane work of Chief Toilet cleaner or head waiter in the dining rooms, would they also be exempt from these less attractive tasks?
Yet another apology for this drifting of the thread.. Perhaps the Puma might get embarked on Ocean
Good point and hopefully it is my interpretation that has allowed me to jump to the wrong assumption
If they are service personnel it reads like they are based shore side and get 'parachuted' onto a ship as and when required?
I guess I am asking questions as opposed to making a statement and no doubt just like your very good self, you can see the problems of not having the so called 'support staff' as part of a ship's company.
I can think of any number of roles an Aircraft Handler might have to perform other than working on aircraft but if they are posted in as support to the embarked squadron, would they then refuse to be a part of a Boarding Party or help ashore to offer assistance toward a civil disaster or quell a civil uprising?? What about the more mundane work of Chief Toilet cleaner or head waiter in the dining rooms, would they also be exempt from these less attractive tasks?
Yet another apology for this drifting of the thread.. Perhaps the Puma might get embarked on Ocean
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: in a state of flux
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannot decide how it will affect the future of the Puma, but i hear (from a mate who is in the place to know) an announcement about the Merlin is imminent, and it is something of a surprise.
Ministers have rejected the logic of transferring it to the Navy. They have correctly reasoned that there exists a credible, trained and ready Merlin Force. Junglies (much respect) have ability, skill and corporate knowledge - that is beyond doubt. But so do the RAF, and embarked Ops and overwater techniques are taught by the RAF, and have been for years. It is FAR FAR cheaper to keep Merlin RAF. It saves a fortune, and NO capability will be lost. Ministers have worked it out.
Merlin to stay RAF. Announcement inmminent. Anyone willing to take my money?
Ministers have rejected the logic of transferring it to the Navy. They have correctly reasoned that there exists a credible, trained and ready Merlin Force. Junglies (much respect) have ability, skill and corporate knowledge - that is beyond doubt. But so do the RAF, and embarked Ops and overwater techniques are taught by the RAF, and have been for years. It is FAR FAR cheaper to keep Merlin RAF. It saves a fortune, and NO capability will be lost. Ministers have worked it out.
Merlin to stay RAF. Announcement inmminent. Anyone willing to take my money?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Borderline England
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So with all of the above exercises being done via roulements by the CHF, why are 6-7 month deployments at sea even being talked about ? Its now proven that we can do LitM without the lengthy sea-time, Shirley ?
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: in a state of flux
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tourist,
Yep, that's what I thought to. I can assure you my source is genuine and adamant the transition won't happen. It ALL came down to £££, and the ministers reasoned it's cheaper to keep it where it is (how can it not be?).
If I am wrong, I'll be the first to say so. But I'm not. It's staying.
Yep, that's what I thought to. I can assure you my source is genuine and adamant the transition won't happen. It ALL came down to £££, and the ministers reasoned it's cheaper to keep it where it is (how can it not be?).
If I am wrong, I'll be the first to say so. But I'm not. It's staying.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Borderline England
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Code:
with nothing more than a dignified silence from the RAF (although some RN types would mistake that for sulking).
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is exactly the type of bickering that is not doing any of us any favours. Only a few weeks ago CAS was supposed to have gone to Benson to provide top level leadership in managing this change.
Either he failed to get his message across or it has been misconstrued by those eagerly hanging onto every word he and AMP's team said.
Either the posters to this thread are saying 'it is not over' are either worried and concerned personnel from the Merlin Force, or staff officers from Air Command/1 Group trying to cover up the perceived poor management of the SH Force, both at the Shawbury end (what a sad debacle) and now in refusing to take accountabilty and responsibilty to manage the Merlin outflow of our personnel.
As to politicians suddenly having a eureka moment, and/or the Army stopping transition due to cost, we must be very careful, we asked for the studies and cost benefit analysis and trust me, there is a General looking down the back of Army's sofa (which includes JHC) and they have NOTseen a significant increase in cost to Merlin transition (HMT and RP don't care what the colour of the uniform converted/re-roled to Merlin is-a student pilot over the next 4 years could be RAF, Army or RN-they cost the same. And unless the Merlin Force is never going to have any 'churn' then Merlin training will continue regardless. .HMT are truly colour blind. But, when the Army has looked at our Stations they have found other areas that they currently pay for, but think they can make savings.
Unless HMG (through PR12) no longer want an amphibious capability, Merlin transition is happening. If it doesn't then we and Army need to start to re-craft all our career profiles for more time and postings in non flying jobs to sea to provide the aviation personnel to a boat even if we do replace an amphibious capability with a pseudo floating DOB concept if/when we can't find Host Nation Support.
If The Merlin upgrade is not taken forward as part of PR12 then the whole aircraft falls over due to obsolescence in the near future anyway, so everyone loses, including Army (reduction in lift).
The politicians know this and they also know that the marinisation is but a fraction of the overall cost.
I am so sad for the people on the shop floor that read these threads being given false information, which results in false hope to our lads and lasses (at this very late stage with Merlin transition already underway) which sadly results in ill feeling and resentment.
Where is our leadership? If there is new information that has changed the situation from CAS' last visit to Benson then it sounds as though he needs to re-visit and tell them that Merlin transition is off as currently there is perceived ambiguity and misinformation by some that is doing nothing but damaging joint relations and de-stabilising families at the heart of this transition.
We will not need to worry about the new pension scheme as our hierarchy would have screwed this so well that the majority of the new blood under training has been made redundant and all the trained experienced personnel are so disillusioned with the leadership that they are looking to leave at the earliest opportunity that suits them and not the MOD/RAF.
Either he failed to get his message across or it has been misconstrued by those eagerly hanging onto every word he and AMP's team said.
Either the posters to this thread are saying 'it is not over' are either worried and concerned personnel from the Merlin Force, or staff officers from Air Command/1 Group trying to cover up the perceived poor management of the SH Force, both at the Shawbury end (what a sad debacle) and now in refusing to take accountabilty and responsibilty to manage the Merlin outflow of our personnel.
As to politicians suddenly having a eureka moment, and/or the Army stopping transition due to cost, we must be very careful, we asked for the studies and cost benefit analysis and trust me, there is a General looking down the back of Army's sofa (which includes JHC) and they have NOTseen a significant increase in cost to Merlin transition (HMT and RP don't care what the colour of the uniform converted/re-roled to Merlin is-a student pilot over the next 4 years could be RAF, Army or RN-they cost the same. And unless the Merlin Force is never going to have any 'churn' then Merlin training will continue regardless. .HMT are truly colour blind. But, when the Army has looked at our Stations they have found other areas that they currently pay for, but think they can make savings.
Unless HMG (through PR12) no longer want an amphibious capability, Merlin transition is happening. If it doesn't then we and Army need to start to re-craft all our career profiles for more time and postings in non flying jobs to sea to provide the aviation personnel to a boat even if we do replace an amphibious capability with a pseudo floating DOB concept if/when we can't find Host Nation Support.
If The Merlin upgrade is not taken forward as part of PR12 then the whole aircraft falls over due to obsolescence in the near future anyway, so everyone loses, including Army (reduction in lift).
The politicians know this and they also know that the marinisation is but a fraction of the overall cost.
I am so sad for the people on the shop floor that read these threads being given false information, which results in false hope to our lads and lasses (at this very late stage with Merlin transition already underway) which sadly results in ill feeling and resentment.
Where is our leadership? If there is new information that has changed the situation from CAS' last visit to Benson then it sounds as though he needs to re-visit and tell them that Merlin transition is off as currently there is perceived ambiguity and misinformation by some that is doing nothing but damaging joint relations and de-stabilising families at the heart of this transition.
We will not need to worry about the new pension scheme as our hierarchy would have screwed this so well that the majority of the new blood under training has been made redundant and all the trained experienced personnel are so disillusioned with the leadership that they are looking to leave at the earliest opportunity that suits them and not the MOD/RAF.
Last edited by MaroonMan4; 9th Apr 2012 at 14:36.
MaroonMan4 V chopabeefer
Looks like we have a straight fight 'know it all' and 'insider trader' going for the highest water mark on the wall!
MM4's rambles are convincing but Chopa's 'my mate said' is hard to argue with. I haven’t spent this much time on the edge of my seat since JR was shot! Perhaps that's it! We'll all wake up and everything since SDSR (or since 1997) has just been a bad dream!
MM4's rambles are convincing but Chopa's 'my mate said' is hard to argue with. I haven’t spent this much time on the edge of my seat since JR was shot! Perhaps that's it! We'll all wake up and everything since SDSR (or since 1997) has just been a bad dream!
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Xen,
You are confusing me with someone that actually cares what the outcome is-chop wins easily.
After all my time in I am so saddened to see friends and their families being subjected to single Service willy waving and some of the worst leadership ever.
How long does it take to make a decision? Gordon Brown announced Rotary Wing Strategy in Dec 2009,with only 8 Chinooks dropped from this original vision.
There have been studies and more studies and even more studies (at our request because we dont seem to like the answer).
Mean while careers and futures are not properly attended to and far more importantly families are unsettled and feel let down.
That is where my ramblings stem from, as well as recognition that fundamentally JHC is a positive example of jointery that is being eroded by this ongoing challenge to Merlin transition.
But hey, I fly Chinooks, so my seat is secure, I have less than 10 years so pension is safe, and am getting to the stage where I will join everyone else and look after number one and get back into my licences.
Sorry Chopabeefer, of course you are right and good luck to the Merlin Force as it sure is going to need it!
You are confusing me with someone that actually cares what the outcome is-chop wins easily.
After all my time in I am so saddened to see friends and their families being subjected to single Service willy waving and some of the worst leadership ever.
How long does it take to make a decision? Gordon Brown announced Rotary Wing Strategy in Dec 2009,with only 8 Chinooks dropped from this original vision.
There have been studies and more studies and even more studies (at our request because we dont seem to like the answer).
Mean while careers and futures are not properly attended to and far more importantly families are unsettled and feel let down.
That is where my ramblings stem from, as well as recognition that fundamentally JHC is a positive example of jointery that is being eroded by this ongoing challenge to Merlin transition.
But hey, I fly Chinooks, so my seat is secure, I have less than 10 years so pension is safe, and am getting to the stage where I will join everyone else and look after number one and get back into my licences.
Sorry Chopabeefer, of course you are right and good luck to the Merlin Force as it sure is going to need it!
Last edited by MaroonMan4; 9th Apr 2012 at 15:17.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England formerly Great Britain
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You nearly had me there; it all sounded pretty good until you spoilt it all by saying:
At which point I question what planet you are living on. One is led to understand that the single service opinion of JHC is low enough to justify staffing its disbandment and the return of the RAF SH to Air Command. This thread does much to support that theory as a 'need' asap.
So are we about to find out why no SH front or rear crew appeared in the second and final round of the RAF redundancy process despite expectation by many if not all to the contrary.
recognition that fundamentally JHC is a positive example of jointery that is being eroded by this ongoing challenge to Merlin transition.
So are we about to find out why no SH front or rear crew appeared in the second and final round of the RAF redundancy process despite expectation by many if not all to the contrary.