Senior RAF Officers Highlight Safety Dangers From Ground Crew Cuts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London Town
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Senior RAF Officers Highlight Safety Dangers From Ground Crew Cuts
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 66
Posts: 6,995
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Mentioned in the Sunday Times a couple of weeks back.
See Wing Co Spry here ...
http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...er-spry-3.html
See Wing Co Spry here ...
http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...er-spry-3.html
Last edited by CoffmanStarter; 6th Aug 2013 at 19:50.
Well spoken, Windy! Hope that your concerns might get through the politicians' thick heads before the whole RAF enters a death spiral.....
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: France
Age: 80
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting to know whether anyone at air rank level has commented on this. It's good to see some leadership from the station's senior officers, but what (if anything) is the top hierarchy doing about it? Hoping it'll die the death, I suspect.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,037
Received 2,914 Likes
on
1,247 Posts
The thing they miss is a valuable point.
They probably look on it as it takes a year plus to train an Engineer, so assume they can replace them in a year with a new Engineer if needed, however they have lost the core experience that only comes with time, and that leaves a big hole in the middle of your engineering capability.
That is different to natural wastage as you are in effect cutting out the central core of Engineers and they can only be replaced with time, and of course that time period relies on fresh intakes of Engineers building their knowledge base which would normally be provided by those that are no longer there, so you then also suffer from a lack of continuity as well.
They probably look on it as it takes a year plus to train an Engineer, so assume they can replace them in a year with a new Engineer if needed, however they have lost the core experience that only comes with time, and that leaves a big hole in the middle of your engineering capability.
That is different to natural wastage as you are in effect cutting out the central core of Engineers and they can only be replaced with time, and of course that time period relies on fresh intakes of Engineers building their knowledge base which would normally be provided by those that are no longer there, so you then also suffer from a lack of continuity as well.
Last edited by NutLoose; 6th Aug 2013 at 19:50.
It strikes I, as a mere squib of a lad, that you can reduce any amount of people when "belts need tightening", but, replacing anyone, Aircrew, Groundcrew or other trade can never be accomplished by simply promoting someone and recruiting more. One thing I always found when posted or promoted was that there was always someone with experience and nous to give me a few pointers. They are busy removing the very people I for one relied on. I'm sure people will try to meet whatever is thrust upon them, but, without that nous and experience they might struggle a bit.
Smudge
Smudge
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,037
Received 2,914 Likes
on
1,247 Posts
The odd thing considering the way the RAF now emulate the Civi world is that we have laid down requirements for minimum licensed coverage and staffing, without which a company cannot operate or will be pulled up until its addressed.
..
..
Last edited by NutLoose; 6th Aug 2013 at 21:22.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: N. Spain
Age: 79
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The decisions for cuts requiring redundancies are made by our blinkered politicians. This begs the question, who decides and at what level are personalities selected for redundancy?
If at station level surely local bosses will be aware of experience and ability of the troops they see every day or by assessment records and be able to recommend which bodies to "let go" and who to keep.
If at station level surely local bosses will be aware of experience and ability of the troops they see every day or by assessment records and be able to recommend which bodies to "let go" and who to keep.
The thing they miss is a valuable point.
They probably look on it as it takes a year plus to train an Engineer, so assume they can replace them in a year with a new Engineer if needed
They probably look on it as it takes a year plus to train an Engineer, so assume they can replace them in a year with a new Engineer if needed
The thing they miss is a valuable point.
They probably look on it as it takes a year plus to train an Engineer, so assume they can replace them in a year with a new Engineer if needed
They probably look on it as it takes a year plus to train an Engineer, so assume they can replace them in a year with a new Engineer if needed
This begs the question, who decides and at what level are personalities selected for redundancy?
It's a dangerous game to play though. When you get it right, this happens. When you get it wrong, well, lets just say reading that article sent my mind straight back to what happened to the Puma Force in the mid-noughties.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: raf
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JTIDS
If only every fleet had the option to have a three day reset and reduce flying hours....
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Midlands
Age: 84
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Drift. Where are the RN going to find anyone who can remember deck skills for our new aircraft carriers, whenever we actually get even one of them?
Last edited by A2QFI; 7th Aug 2013 at 06:25.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone know what the PVR rate is at the moment?
I for one found it slightly fanciful that we could make 'targeted redundancies' and everyone else would simply march on the bearing. I assumed some would walk immediately following SDSR but the larger proportion would see out a tour or test the water before walking...which would be about now.
I for one found it slightly fanciful that we could make 'targeted redundancies' and everyone else would simply march on the bearing. I assumed some would walk immediately following SDSR but the larger proportion would see out a tour or test the water before walking...which would be about now.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Imagine you are that boss. Who do you keep? The good guy, shed loads of experience, does the job in his sleep - potentially promoted soon and posted, or the new guy, well trained, keen as mustard, still learning on the job - sparkling future ahead of him?
I suspect you would keep the former and the posters would select that person for redundancy. Short term pain for long term gain.