Air Cadets grounded?
The Capstan was a disaster, the Bocian was lovely but very expensive, the Blanik was noisy - I could go on and on about training gliders, I have flown most of them - K13 is the BEST.
I’ve flown three of the four gliders you mentioned, but ỉonically, never the K13. I have lots of instructional time in Blaniks, but only a few flights in a Capstan and a Bocian, early in my gliding career, before I had even gone solo.
I’m intrigued by your comment about the Capstan. What was so bad about it?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PS what do you plan to do about the canopy? Open cockpit?
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The metal wing of the 2-33 is simple and easy to fix and most importantly is damage tolerant and easy to assess, unlike composite structures
The point of Air Cadet gliding is basic flying experience for young people. What the program needs is a simple to maintain, simple to fly, hard to bust, basic glider !
The point of Air Cadet gliding is basic flying experience for young people. What the program needs is a simple to maintain, simple to fly, hard to bust, basic glider !
And the Viking IS a simple to maintain, simple to fly, hard to bust, basic glider that has been let down by poor understanding of the aircraft occurring under excessive regulations creating a vacuum of ‘that’ll do’ maintenance.
There is no reason why that has to continue.
Olympia 463,
I’ve flown three of the four gliders you mentioned, but ỉonically, never the K13. I have lots of instructional time in Blaniks, but only a few flights in a Capstan and a Bocian, early in my gliding career, before I had even gone solo.
I’m intrigued by your comment about the Capstan. What was so bad about it?
I’ve flown three of the four gliders you mentioned, but ỉonically, never the K13. I have lots of instructional time in Blaniks, but only a few flights in a Capstan and a Bocian, early in my gliding career, before I had even gone solo.
I’m intrigued by your comment about the Capstan. What was so bad about it?
Ray Stafford-Allen kindly brought his T49 Capstan to Halton one weekend for us all to sample at his own expense. It was like a 2 seat Swallow and would have fitted the bill perfectly, but that's just my personal opinion.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I knew that the armchair glider pilots would join in to this thread and it would go go off track.
What is the ATC for these days? The RAF require very few pilots these days, so as a feeder for the RAF you are kidding the kids. To get to be a fast jet pilot you MUST have a degree in engineering or its equivalent. I expect (but do not know for sure) that the same applies to helicopters.
If the point of the ATC is to enthuse youngsters with the idea of flying as a career you are selling them something that 99% of them will never aspire to. The largest amount of flying done these days is in commercial jet aircraft to which you progress maybe from propellor types. Some airlines have direct entry to cadetships for people with much lower educational credentials. However this route needs the bank of Mum and Dad to be achievable.
So the ATC needs to review its objectives before it decides how achieve them. Are they doing this for 21st century youth?
Once those objectives have been determined the need for aircraft can be examined, and the type of aircraft will be established.
My comments about K13 vs ASK21 were meant to establish the type of equipment they might need if they in fact intend to go on offering training to solo standard.
I am long out of the loop here, and my observations were hopefully going to concentrate minds. Instead of which we seem bogged down in a discussion about maintenance.
What is the ATC for these days? The RAF require very few pilots these days, so as a feeder for the RAF you are kidding the kids. To get to be a fast jet pilot you MUST have a degree in engineering or its equivalent. I expect (but do not know for sure) that the same applies to helicopters.
If the point of the ATC is to enthuse youngsters with the idea of flying as a career you are selling them something that 99% of them will never aspire to. The largest amount of flying done these days is in commercial jet aircraft to which you progress maybe from propellor types. Some airlines have direct entry to cadetships for people with much lower educational credentials. However this route needs the bank of Mum and Dad to be achievable.
So the ATC needs to review its objectives before it decides how achieve them. Are they doing this for 21st century youth?
Once those objectives have been determined the need for aircraft can be examined, and the type of aircraft will be established.
My comments about K13 vs ASK21 were meant to establish the type of equipment they might need if they in fact intend to go on offering training to solo standard.
I am long out of the loop here, and my observations were hopefully going to concentrate minds. Instead of which we seem bogged down in a discussion about maintenance.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: across the border....
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The type i.e. primary or DG1000, or anything inbetween, is immaterial but the physical maintenance and documented maintenance is of utmost importance as it is that, or more precisely lack of, that has lead to the current situation.
You can have the most basic of airframes but if undocumented and unapproved maintenance is being carried out, would you want to fly it?
7700
You can have the most basic of airframes but if undocumented and unapproved maintenance is being carried out, would you want to fly it?
7700
Guest
Posts: n/a
@India42
The Capstan was so heavy that we had to build a new winch to launch it. Side by side tuition seems like a good idea till you have to convert pupils to single seaters. We bought a Swallow which seemed a good idea but the differences were quite a problem when briefing new solo pilots to fly it. At Dunstable (a later club in my career) we trained in K13 and soloed on the K18 (a K8 with K6E wings). No problems about conversion. What the pupil saw in front of him was exactly what he saw in the K13.
Even aerotowing the Capstan (we had a Tiger) was quite challenging from our small field at Stoke on Trent, and we used to joke that a bus timetable was useful to be sure of a safe exit over the hedge.
However it was great for checking out potential instructors and the National Coach had one, and I took my ticket in it at Sutton Bank.
The Capstan was so heavy that we had to build a new winch to launch it. Side by side tuition seems like a good idea till you have to convert pupils to single seaters. We bought a Swallow which seemed a good idea but the differences were quite a problem when briefing new solo pilots to fly it. At Dunstable (a later club in my career) we trained in K13 and soloed on the K18 (a K8 with K6E wings). No problems about conversion. What the pupil saw in front of him was exactly what he saw in the K13.
Even aerotowing the Capstan (we had a Tiger) was quite challenging from our small field at Stoke on Trent, and we used to joke that a bus timetable was useful to be sure of a safe exit over the hedge.
However it was great for checking out potential instructors and the National Coach had one, and I took my ticket in it at Sutton Bank.
Guest
Posts: n/a
@chevron
Converting from Capstan to Swallow was not all that easy. The weight difference alone made the handling and performance quite different. T31 to Tutor was a doddle.
The old T31 also had the advantage that on the day when the chap in the back got out and didn't get back in again, the briefing was confined to mentioning that a higher launch was now going to happen, and a 360 or two might be a good idea before joining the downwind leg. One to the right, and one to the left on your second solo, and you had vour 'B' followed later by an expensive round in the 'Tiger Moth' (our local pub). I was the first ab-initio to go solo (in a T31) at our newly formed club in 1964. It was a memorable occasion.
Converting from Capstan to Swallow was not all that easy. The weight difference alone made the handling and performance quite different. T31 to Tutor was a doddle.
The old T31 also had the advantage that on the day when the chap in the back got out and didn't get back in again, the briefing was confined to mentioning that a higher launch was now going to happen, and a 360 or two might be a good idea before joining the downwind leg. One to the right, and one to the left on your second solo, and you had vour 'B' followed later by an expensive round in the 'Tiger Moth' (our local pub). I was the first ab-initio to go solo (in a T31) at our newly formed club in 1964. It was a memorable occasion.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somerset, UK
Age: 40
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To get to be a fast jet pilot you MUST have a degree in engineering or its equivalent. I expect (but do not know for sure) that the same applies to helicopters.
...
If the point of the ATC is to enthuse youngsters with the idea of flying as a career you are selling them something that 99% of them will never aspire to. The largest amount of flying done these days is in commercial jet aircraft to which you progress maybe from propellor types.
...
If the point of the ATC is to enthuse youngsters with the idea of flying as a career you are selling them something that 99% of them will never aspire to. The largest amount of flying done these days is in commercial jet aircraft to which you progress maybe from propellor types.
But I don't think the ATC has ever been just about producing pilots. Even in days gone by the ratio of cadets to future jet jocks must have been roughly proportionate to what it is now. What the ATC has always been about is producing 'air minded' youth... surely the requirement for this has not gone away, even though we now need fewer pilots than 30 years ago.
I have nothing of value to add regarding aircraft types, apart from a lasting disbelief that this has not yet been sorted out so the ATC can get back to doing what it's been doing quite successfully for a long time now: getting young people off the ground in large numbers... because surely that's the objective?
Cheers all
Guest
Posts: n/a
@TommyOv
I did say 'or equivalent'. Your friend may well have had something they were prepared to accept. The amount of engineering you will have to learn, to fly a modern jet is more easily assimilated by degree level entrants. The cost of training a fast jet pilot in the RAF these days makes it essential that people start with a good chance of surviving the training.
I don't think the ATC was ever set up as a feeder to RAF flying training. It is good that some ex ATC make it to the cockpit, but the essential feature of potentially giving air time to all cadets still exists. Otherwise what's the point?
I did say 'or equivalent'. Your friend may well have had something they were prepared to accept. The amount of engineering you will have to learn, to fly a modern jet is more easily assimilated by degree level entrants. The cost of training a fast jet pilot in the RAF these days makes it essential that people start with a good chance of surviving the training.
I don't think the ATC was ever set up as a feeder to RAF flying training. It is good that some ex ATC make it to the cockpit, but the essential feature of potentially giving air time to all cadets still exists. Otherwise what's the point?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Somewhere in England
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re Focus on the real issues
Absolutely pointless talking about what we might buy in to the future - it's academic as we have little enough cash to pay for front line stuff for the moment.
We should never have had the problem in the first place; The tax payers funded two brand new fleets of service registered aircraft ( Grob Viking and Grob Vigilant) circa 1990. Had the RAF been competent, then the 3.5 year pause, closures of VGS units, discharge of loyal staff, and loss of opportunity to Air Cadets and on going reductions in VGS activity for Air Cadets would not have happened.
The Defence Select Committee and all MP's need to be reminded that taxpayers provide the cash and that there is a responsibility and accountability for cases where the tax payer has been dramatically short changed whether that be due to fraud, incompetence or any other reasons.
What is still long overdue, is a competent investigation into the failures within the RAF that led to this appalling situation. No more smoke and mirrors ! - Write to your MP now!! Give them a real job to do -
We should never have had the problem in the first place; The tax payers funded two brand new fleets of service registered aircraft ( Grob Viking and Grob Vigilant) circa 1990. Had the RAF been competent, then the 3.5 year pause, closures of VGS units, discharge of loyal staff, and loss of opportunity to Air Cadets and on going reductions in VGS activity for Air Cadets would not have happened.
The Defence Select Committee and all MP's need to be reminded that taxpayers provide the cash and that there is a responsibility and accountability for cases where the tax payer has been dramatically short changed whether that be due to fraud, incompetence or any other reasons.
What is still long overdue, is a competent investigation into the failures within the RAF that led to this appalling situation. No more smoke and mirrors ! - Write to your MP now!! Give them a real job to do -
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Somewhere in England
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for restricted numbers required - well purely and simply, in the VGS's the RAF had, and have a very good screening mechanism, which doesn't just check real skills, personality typing, work ethic, determination and other personality traits which are the bedrock of success in service life.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Let us by all means focus on the real issue:
This is what I have been trying to do. The ATC needs to decide what its role in the 21st century is, and until it does that everything else is academic. If I was the man at the MoD I would be expecting some clarity here by now.
I don't propose to bandy words about how you get into flying jets in the RAF these days. I asked this question of their recruitment folk and that was the answer I got. Your friends may have joined up before this minimum was in use. Or they may have presented with a good enough equivalent. Can we leave this topic now?
I doubt that re-equipping the ATC with new gliders (or fixing the current fleet) would cost much in comparison to the cost of a batch of F35's for the QE. The ATC need however, to establish the goals they are seeking before another penny is spent. As you rightly point out it is OUR money.
If it is 'air experience', then there are other ways of giving that without running a large military gliding club. But I think it would be hard to find any youngster who has not been up in some kind of aeroplane these days. If it is the experience of taking to the air on your own (which can be life changing in many ways) then the ATC will indeed need a lot of gliders - which is where I came in.
This is what I have been trying to do. The ATC needs to decide what its role in the 21st century is, and until it does that everything else is academic. If I was the man at the MoD I would be expecting some clarity here by now.
I don't propose to bandy words about how you get into flying jets in the RAF these days. I asked this question of their recruitment folk and that was the answer I got. Your friends may have joined up before this minimum was in use. Or they may have presented with a good enough equivalent. Can we leave this topic now?
I doubt that re-equipping the ATC with new gliders (or fixing the current fleet) would cost much in comparison to the cost of a batch of F35's for the QE. The ATC need however, to establish the goals they are seeking before another penny is spent. As you rightly point out it is OUR money.
If it is 'air experience', then there are other ways of giving that without running a large military gliding club. But I think it would be hard to find any youngster who has not been up in some kind of aeroplane these days. If it is the experience of taking to the air on your own (which can be life changing in many ways) then the ATC will indeed need a lot of gliders - which is where I came in.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Olympia 463
The primary reason for the Cadet forces is to character build the citizens of the future.
Gliding is a very good way to build self confidence and responsibility in young people , it is just a happy coincidence if you recruit service pilots from the cadet forces.
The bottom line is the youth of the country have been badly let down and we will all be poorer for it.
Gliding is a very good way to build self confidence and responsibility in young people , it is just a happy coincidence if you recruit service pilots from the cadet forces.
The bottom line is the youth of the country have been badly let down and we will all be poorer for it.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's some interesting stuff appearing here - which is good - discussion always helps clarify things.
Reasons given recently for having the ATC doing gliding have ranged from 'providing pilots of the future' to 'giving air time to all cadets' to 'building self confidence and responsibility in young people'.
All very noble, but my point remains - I'm not at all sure that this any of these activities should be funded by the RAF out of the defence vote. The strains on the defence budget are well known, and I'm just not convinced that spending any money on building a new (very large) fleet of military owned gliders can be justified right now.
We've also had the argument that re-equipping the ATC with new gliders (or fixing the current fleet) would not cost much in comparison to the cost of a batch of F35's for the QE. With due respect, that's a bit of a stretch. Compared with the cost of buying the F-35s, almost anything would 'not cost much'. Perhaps a better question might be 'how many Royal Marines would we like to make redundant so that the ATC can fly its cadets in Government owned aircraft?'
Oh, and the F-35s are going to be 'for' the RAF. They are required to operate from the carriers, but I'm sure that the RAF will seek to minimise the time spent at sea.
Best regards as ever to those in town having to make damnably hard choices,
Engines
Reasons given recently for having the ATC doing gliding have ranged from 'providing pilots of the future' to 'giving air time to all cadets' to 'building self confidence and responsibility in young people'.
All very noble, but my point remains - I'm not at all sure that this any of these activities should be funded by the RAF out of the defence vote. The strains on the defence budget are well known, and I'm just not convinced that spending any money on building a new (very large) fleet of military owned gliders can be justified right now.
We've also had the argument that re-equipping the ATC with new gliders (or fixing the current fleet) would not cost much in comparison to the cost of a batch of F35's for the QE. With due respect, that's a bit of a stretch. Compared with the cost of buying the F-35s, almost anything would 'not cost much'. Perhaps a better question might be 'how many Royal Marines would we like to make redundant so that the ATC can fly its cadets in Government owned aircraft?'
Oh, and the F-35s are going to be 'for' the RAF. They are required to operate from the carriers, but I'm sure that the RAF will seek to minimise the time spent at sea.
Best regards as ever to those in town having to make damnably hard choices,
Engines
I may only be a former bluntie, but the fact that both the ATC and the UAS were presented very forcefully as "WE FLY!!!!!" organisations very nearly put me off...
Cadets don't *need* to fly. It's nice, sure. But need?
The aims of the ATC are to "To promote and encourage among young men and women a practical interest in aviation and the RAF" is flying really the only way of doing that?
Cadets Let Down
Mupp O T North I think you should have a look at the 'current' ATC 'Brochure' / Web Site.
Aviation activities are still the 'MAIN' promotion items complete with images of both power and gliding operations. To suggest that this is NOT the 'main' area of interest is not realistic and is what makes (or used to make) the Air Cadets different from other youth organisations. The ability to solo in a 'service' aircraft was indeed an unique facility and was operated by competent volunteers for decades 'WITHOUT' a huge input from the mainstream RAF.
To suggest that both the Cadets and the staff that operated such a world class system have not been let down shows little regard to the memory of how the full time cretons who 'SHOULD' have been backing up the volunteer system totally 'FAILED' in their duties FOR WHICH THEY WERE GETTING WELL PAiD. LEADERSHIP LEADERSHIP LEADERSHIP if its not there all the hype facebook. and twatter is worthless.
Aviation activities are still the 'MAIN' promotion items complete with images of both power and gliding operations. To suggest that this is NOT the 'main' area of interest is not realistic and is what makes (or used to make) the Air Cadets different from other youth organisations. The ability to solo in a 'service' aircraft was indeed an unique facility and was operated by competent volunteers for decades 'WITHOUT' a huge input from the mainstream RAF.
To suggest that both the Cadets and the staff that operated such a world class system have not been let down shows little regard to the memory of how the full time cretons who 'SHOULD' have been backing up the volunteer system totally 'FAILED' in their duties FOR WHICH THEY WERE GETTING WELL PAiD. LEADERSHIP LEADERSHIP LEADERSHIP if its not there all the hype facebook. and twatter is worthless.