Aircrew Sustainability
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Where the heart belongs
Age: 55
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Bet you wish you didn't get rid of all those Navs in the redundancies eh?
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Behind the wire.
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's not confuse 'Aircrew Shortage' with 'Nav Shortage'. There is a pilot shortage and an even worse QFI shortage. I would guess that proportionally a lot of those 400 in aircrew annotated ground jobs are already filled with people who can only fly in circles and cutting the jobs won't fix the pilot shortage.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,565
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
"We have agreed to delete or reapportion around 400 aircrew-annotated posts over a 6-year period to either non-regular aircrew or other branches, and to introduce the requirement for all aircrew posts to be prioritised in their order of importance to remain as aircrew annotated"
I also assume that any aircrew volunteering for these posts risk having their flying pay reduced or even lost as the post no longer carries the aircrew tag? Sounds like a way of saving money to me.....
PS. Anyone else having trouble with the "Quotes" button? Stopped working for me.
I also assume that any aircrew volunteering for these posts risk having their flying pay reduced or even lost as the post no longer carries the aircrew tag? Sounds like a way of saving money to me.....
PS. Anyone else having trouble with the "Quotes" button? Stopped working for me.
Now with increasing use of civilian's/ex-military pilots being employed at UAS, BFT, MTFS, and now the civilianisation of SAR we are dining in the last chance saloon. With the RAF, FAA and AAC shrinking where will the next generation of current QFI's etc. employed by the likes of SERCO & BABCOCK come from? With the airlines looking to recruit new pilots will there be any ex-service pilots interested or young enough to fill the vacancies that will start to appear when the current ex-service aircrew retire?
The training pipeline gets turned off all too easily to save money in the short term but is very difficult to turn on again. As we will no doubt find out only at considerable cost.
The training pipeline gets turned off all too easily to save money in the short term but is very difficult to turn on again. As we will no doubt find out only at considerable cost.
Where would the necessary QFIs, aerodromes and training aeroplanes come form, should it be necessary to support a training surge?
I also consider that these mercenary-employing civil contractors should be required to demonstrate a 30-year manning sustainability plot, rather than just some alleged short-term budget savings.
If (when?) MFTS falls flat on its face, how many of us will say "We told you so....but you wouldn't listen!!"
It is an aircrew shortage, not just a pilot shortage - but the 2 are linked. The RAF got too comfortable with the traditional higher retention rate for non-pilots compared to pilots and this helped to offset the creeping disaster area that was (initially) pilot retention.
Two things changed:
- The massive reduction in non-pilots due to restructuring/front-line need
- The push/pull retention issues that have triggered a loss-rate of non-pilot aircrew at an unprecedented level
I guess someone in the ivory towers thought that the highly motivated and career aware single brevet types would just soldier on in their current rank on repetitive aircrew-only ground tours with little or no development opportunities. Then came the pension changes, NEM, pay restraint, PAS restrictions, reduced promotion rates, removal of FRIs etc etc. Seeing how many of the recently retired/PVR'd are now working as contractors on £500 a day providing substitute manpower to MoD I do wonder at the sanity of our leadership and those that remain.
Two things changed:
- The massive reduction in non-pilots due to restructuring/front-line need
- The push/pull retention issues that have triggered a loss-rate of non-pilot aircrew at an unprecedented level
I guess someone in the ivory towers thought that the highly motivated and career aware single brevet types would just soldier on in their current rank on repetitive aircrew-only ground tours with little or no development opportunities. Then came the pension changes, NEM, pay restraint, PAS restrictions, reduced promotion rates, removal of FRIs etc etc. Seeing how many of the recently retired/PVR'd are now working as contractors on £500 a day providing substitute manpower to MoD I do wonder at the sanity of our leadership and those that remain.
- The push/pull retention issues that have triggered a loss-rate of non-pilot aircrew at an unprecedented level
Well done, chaps....
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also assume that any aircrew volunteering for these posts risk having their flying pay reduced or even lost as the post no longer carries the aircrew tag? Sounds like a way of saving money to me.....
It's just an excuse to cut the most highly paid (but also experienced) personnel from those jobs. The problem is, as we have seen with the ops world, the output standard can't be maintained when you put people into these posts without the suitable experience (although I have had some recent examples where the output from ops has been excellent).
Put inexperienced people in those jobs and don't be surprised when your frontline units are getting constantly bothered with phone calls and emails asking for SQEP advice and your ultimate output standard falls through the floor.
The problem is, as we have seen with the ops world, the output standard can't
be maintained when you put people into these posts without the suitable
experience
Providing they have the same 5,000 hrs of deep tactical knowledge and hard earned operational experience that I've gained over the last 30 years!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: in my combat underpants
Age: 53
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps some of those posts are not filled with a steely-eyed two-winged warrior. Perhaps some of those posts haven't been actually filled for years, either by aircrew or indeed by anyone.
Things change. My own Branch went through a big re-structuring and shone a bright light in the corners of the manning plot and did some mature thinking. Some posts were not a priority - not for the Branch or even for the RAF as a whole. Things around the posts had changed and things hadn't caught up.
I'm not saying this is the case here, but it will probably be part of it. It is always interesting, for those who can, to access the spreadsheet on the manning website and sort it by Branch. There are some strange and wonderful posts out there that don't get filled or have little, if anything, to do with the Branch.
Things change. My own Branch went through a big re-structuring and shone a bright light in the corners of the manning plot and did some mature thinking. Some posts were not a priority - not for the Branch or even for the RAF as a whole. Things around the posts had changed and things hadn't caught up.
I'm not saying this is the case here, but it will probably be part of it. It is always interesting, for those who can, to access the spreadsheet on the manning website and sort it by Branch. There are some strange and wonderful posts out there that don't get filled or have little, if anything, to do with the Branch.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's about time we stopped saying we can do more (or the same) for less. Personal career performance is assessed almost exclusively around accomplishing tasks which then multiply exponentially at each and every level below the very top tier VSOs. Activity replaces valuable work and a vicious situation of burn out and malcontent creeps in. Some very smart people are getting bored and are leaving.
This is already a room full of elephants, but if I might point out another one - flying hours.
This may come as a shock but a lot of RAF pilots joined to..fly aeroplanes!
This may come as a shock but a lot of RAF pilots joined to..fly aeroplanes!
Big mate of the admin persuasion has just had nearly 5 years in the Far East as Air Attache and Defence Attaché in some very interesting places, and I bet his post was annotated "GD" or whatever it is called these days.
This may come as a shock but a lot of RAF pilots joined to..fly aeroplanes!
A couple of days ago I learned that a Luftwaffe Tornado wing is giving its pilots 41 hours......per year....
Is it any better in the RAF?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First tour averaged 500 per year, second tour slightly lower although next year is expected to be monster... 500 plus I reckon. Some of us are currently doing 80 hour+ months if you are (un)lucky (depending on perspective!).
Best 31 day month was 123 hours with over 150 sectors.
Dont want to do that again! Its very fleet dependent, heard rumours sentinel guys max out on their hours pretty much every year due to the "on station" nature of the job (plus a bit of 'freelance' I hear).
The big issue I forsee if the airlines go spastic recruitment wise is retention. Whilst current rating is a requirement for now, having lots of experience monging round without a ROS is a dangerous place to be, when your experience is stuck behind a desk and finds out what home stability is like. Especially if rumours of overseas airlines hubbing LGW Are to be believed. We are much smaller as a force and any individual experience now leaving forms a bigger percentage of the lost pie. Not to forget the 130+ front enders needed to establish 400m, plus fleet growth (voyager), plus the result of pretty much most 1st/2nd tourists having a ticket in their pocket and no pension to stay in for. Not grumbling, just the very difficult situation we face.
Retirement of 130K Tri* and VC10 should help.
Best 31 day month was 123 hours with over 150 sectors.
Dont want to do that again! Its very fleet dependent, heard rumours sentinel guys max out on their hours pretty much every year due to the "on station" nature of the job (plus a bit of 'freelance' I hear).
The big issue I forsee if the airlines go spastic recruitment wise is retention. Whilst current rating is a requirement for now, having lots of experience monging round without a ROS is a dangerous place to be, when your experience is stuck behind a desk and finds out what home stability is like. Especially if rumours of overseas airlines hubbing LGW Are to be believed. We are much smaller as a force and any individual experience now leaving forms a bigger percentage of the lost pie. Not to forget the 130+ front enders needed to establish 400m, plus fleet growth (voyager), plus the result of pretty much most 1st/2nd tourists having a ticket in their pocket and no pension to stay in for. Not grumbling, just the very difficult situation we face.
Retirement of 130K Tri* and VC10 should help.
Last edited by VinRouge; 20th Dec 2013 at 14:12.
Aircrew training and retention is just like every other part of the Military
There is never time or money to do the job right the first time, but there will always be time and money to do it over after everything is FUBAR'd.....
There is never time or money to do the job right the first time, but there will always be time and money to do it over after everything is FUBAR'd.....
While numbers of aircrew, and retention, may be an issue, it would appear that Manning are not using, or not being allowed to use, all of the tools at their disposal....
About 10 months ago, with retirement looming, I was considering my options. I spoke to my desk officer at Manning about a possible extension beyond 55, to be told they were virtually impossible to obtain. Apparently it would require a business case written by a Wg Cdr/Grp Capt before going in front of some sort of board for a decision to be made.
While keeping my skills might not have been considered vital to the RAF, my retention would have freed up a younger individual who could have been better employed elsewhere other than doing the job I was then undertaking and which still needed doing.
All this was over a possible one year extension, which would still have seen me out before the magic cut off date of Apr 15.
It appears that FTRS is easier to achieve than an extension in the regulars.
About 10 months ago, with retirement looming, I was considering my options. I spoke to my desk officer at Manning about a possible extension beyond 55, to be told they were virtually impossible to obtain. Apparently it would require a business case written by a Wg Cdr/Grp Capt before going in front of some sort of board for a decision to be made.
While keeping my skills might not have been considered vital to the RAF, my retention would have freed up a younger individual who could have been better employed elsewhere other than doing the job I was then undertaking and which still needed doing.
All this was over a possible one year extension, which would still have seen me out before the magic cut off date of Apr 15.
It appears that FTRS is easier to achieve than an extension in the regulars.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bet you wish you didn't get rid of all those Navs in the redundancies eh?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Where the heart belongs
Age: 55
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
more ca$h, less stress, more fun, fewer hours
(Happy Christmas by the way)