AirTanker First Officers
So, come on you advocates of obsolete, orphan fleet, crushingly expensive and unreliable Tristars, tell us why this contract that provides 14 state of the art tanker transports, along with new hangars, offices, simulators, training, deep maintenance, 14 civilian sponsored aircrew and about 40 civilian groundcrew for the RAF aircrew and groundcrew at Brize Norton to operate is somehow worse than what went before?
Onceapilot,
Who the F*** put you in charge?
I don't have a beef about the RAF Voyager fleet, so why should I make a case, you are the one bleating on endlessly about it, you make a case!
Who the F*** put you in charge?
I don't have a beef about the RAF Voyager fleet, so why should I make a case, you are the one bleating on endlessly about it, you make a case!
My personal gripe is whether the PFI is better than the other procurement option. The other point I would make is that having been driven down the PFI route we were limited in the ac configuration. All the other customers of A330 tanker elected for the MRTT which I would advocate gives a better range of options. Just remind me what the Aussies said PFI stands for?
Thanks pr00ne, nice use of the vernacular mate. The TriStar fleet was the most efficient cost/capability widebody fleet the RAF will ever have, almost constantly on Ops and always under-resourced and under-rated.
What was wrong with the proposed fleet/life enhancement and the FTRS manning that could have provided a cheap medium term solution at a fraction of the cost?
OAP
What was wrong with the proposed fleet/life enhancement and the FTRS manning that could have provided a cheap medium term solution at a fraction of the cost?OAP
Airtanker salaries apparently £90ish Capt £60+ P 2
Rumored that a future Voyager delivery is a second civil version and leased to charter outfit, Thompson? Based ex Brize, Glasgow mentioned. Airtanker flight crew, civvy cabin crew. Hence requirement for more F/O. Presumably they are ok for Capts. (Hopefully in airline colours!)
Rumored that a future Voyager delivery is a second civil version and leased to charter outfit, Thompson? Based ex Brize, Glasgow mentioned. Airtanker flight crew, civvy cabin crew. Hence requirement for more F/O. Presumably they are ok for Capts. (Hopefully in airline colours!)
vascodegama wrote:
My recollection is that 'Hither' said that it stood for "Poms are F***ing Idiots"!
Just remind me what the Aussies said PFI stands for?
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
"NO Money" is an interesting phrase.
Of course there is no money, so long as a PSBR exists (or whatever the PSBR is called this week). If the government has to borrow money to operate, it is self evident that there is "NO Money".
However, the UK government still manages to spend money on various initiatives, whether from income or borrowing, to the tune of 720bn last year.
There is certainly money to spend, and FSTA would have been small beer in comparison with the overall budget had it been bought outright say over 5 years.
The PFI is just another way to borrow the money. It takes the borrowing "off balance sheet" and allows the "on balance sheet" expenditure to be put against things that people will vote for.
Politics.
Of course there is no money, so long as a PSBR exists (or whatever the PSBR is called this week). If the government has to borrow money to operate, it is self evident that there is "NO Money".
However, the UK government still manages to spend money on various initiatives, whether from income or borrowing, to the tune of 720bn last year.
There is certainly money to spend, and FSTA would have been small beer in comparison with the overall budget had it been bought outright say over 5 years.
The PFI is just another way to borrow the money. It takes the borrowing "off balance sheet" and allows the "on balance sheet" expenditure to be put against things that people will vote for.
Politics.
£90k is seriously low for Widebody command. Less than most EZY skippers get. £60k for a right seat job sounds attractive - I would be applying just out of interest if I had a bus rating.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's clearly high enough to have triggered resentment in some quarters, jw; "...50% higher for civies (sic) doing half the job". Is this mean-spirited but revealing comment perhaps a pointer to what lies behind the negativity towards ATrS??
Considering those civvies (or civies) have shouldered their full training risk -and paid for every penny of it themselves, plus tax, one could say those pay rates, far from being justification for (predicted) sniping, represent excellent value for money.
Considering those civvies (or civies) have shouldered their full training risk -and paid for every penny of it themselves, plus tax, one could say those pay rates, far from being justification for (predicted) sniping, represent excellent value for money.
I'm sure that as long as the contract includes operational activities, then it is likely a good deal in this day and age. And, if these aircrew are signed up to provide such operational service, then they are equally worthy of whatever emolument they may accrue. Lets not forget, the only reason that service pilots are paid less, is their inability to voice their objection to lower pay. Credit where it's due chaps, these boys are doing the governments bidding, and being paid for their support.
Smudge
Smudge
Unfortunately, the FSTA PFI exists like a Lamprey. Air Tanker could not profit within the normal airline industry, the appalling VFM is obvious and will cost the RAF dearly in the future. Whatever the merits of the contracted personnel, they will join/not join out of choice.
OAP
OAP
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Join/not join out of choice??" Whereas you were clubbed and dragged in by press-gang? Thank you at least for revealing the true reason behind the bitterness towards ATrS; and if that had been in doubt I would cite the general lack of interest in the unusual and expensive lease-purchase arrangement for the C17.
"Cost the RAF dearly in future".. being as your plan involved refurbishing (read spraying with platinum) a few very tired 1970's ex-airliners (didn't they actually upgrade one to an EFIS flt deck -how did that go?) then running the sole fleet in existence, excuse us if we treat your views with a pinch of salt.
"Cost the RAF dearly in future".. being as your plan involved refurbishing (read spraying with platinum) a few very tired 1970's ex-airliners (didn't they actually upgrade one to an EFIS flt deck -how did that go?) then running the sole fleet in existence, excuse us if we treat your views with a pinch of salt.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I am not quite sure why opinions about the poor VFM of the FSTA PFI and the financial profit basis of of the Air Tanker company should make one a target for abuse?
Whatever, The PFI will doubtless turn and bite the RAF on the bum
(Some might say it already has?). Over the next quarter of a century either: the government will decide to buy-out the contract or, the RAF (government) will need big changes to the contract that will cost even more money or, Air Tanker will negotiate even greater charges or even, go bust and drop the whole thing. I give it five years before this sort of major change. Just my opinion.
OAP
Whatever, The PFI will doubtless turn and bite the RAF on the bum (Some might say it already has?). Over the next quarter of a century either: the government will decide to buy-out the contract or, the RAF (government) will need big changes to the contract that will cost even more money or, Air Tanker will negotiate even greater charges or even, go bust and drop the whole thing. I give it five years before this sort of major change. Just my opinion.OAP
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question (for pr00ne): How much would it have cost for the raf/MoD to buy and operate 14 Airbus Voyager aircraft over 30 years compared to the £10.5Bn deal currently in place?
If more then the deal is a good one.
If less...
No more nonsense about the money was unavailable, it was available but was spent elswhere. To buy votes.
If more then the deal is a good one.
If less...
No more nonsense about the money was unavailable, it was available but was spent elswhere. To buy votes.
Last edited by Willard Whyte; 18th May 2014 at 19:39.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is only by going over the PFI contract with a very sharp eye will you discover if it is or is not a good deal for UK PLC ( RAF).
I would think that those on this forum are not equipped with enough of the "small print" in the contract to make that call.
To give a small example of this RAF pilots have not had to put their hands in their pockets for their training, in fact they have been paid to do it.
The civilian pilots have had to find the money for training and to finance the cost of living while doing so. The civilian is paid more than the military pilot but which is the most cost effective way to fill that seat over 25 years ?
The truth of the matter is I don't know the answer but these are the sort of questions that have to be asked when deciding if this PFI is good value for money......... Or not !
I would think that those on this forum are not equipped with enough of the "small print" in the contract to make that call.
To give a small example of this RAF pilots have not had to put their hands in their pockets for their training, in fact they have been paid to do it.
The civilian pilots have had to find the money for training and to finance the cost of living while doing so. The civilian is paid more than the military pilot but which is the most cost effective way to fill that seat over 25 years ?
The truth of the matter is I don't know the answer but these are the sort of questions that have to be asked when deciding if this PFI is good value for money......... Or not !