Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

SDSR 15

Old 27th Apr 2015, 22:03
  #221 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Darling - where are we?
Posts: 2,580
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
Photo planet,

I'm not sure on Sandhurst. If it were a precursor to a Defence Force style structure, then a new facility along the lines of a Junior Shrivenham - Shrivenham Secondary School if you like to accompany the current Shrivenham Polytechnic was more what I was thinking. So maybe a new build somewhere removed from all current trg sites to reinforce the move to a Defence Force.

As for the pay - yes to all ranks upwards from cpl, and fg pay only payable when you are actually in an actual fg appointment, not necessarily just the days you fly.

Middleground,

We were just playing Devil's advocate, the specific terminology is less important than the concept in this case, although the most recent AFPRB report does refer to it as both RRP (Flying) and Flying Pay on the same page.

As for the concept, I have friends receiving other RRP which is payable only in posts actively engaged in that duty and for a very few related staff posts. For all those others who hold the qualification, they are not entitled to continued payment when posted to other non-RRP annotated posts simply because they hold a niche qualification. I only suggested it in my original post because one could argue that a precedent has been set already. I would also argue that the only people who will be affected are those currently serving, so there would be retention issues. However, for those eager youngsters who are desperate to fly, I doubt Flying pay is the key driver to their recruitment - for the bean counters' purpose, let us assume that the argument if experience vs youth is not an argument they consider on their spreadsheets

Last edited by Melchett01; 27th Apr 2015 at 22:16.
Melchett01 is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2015, 22:18
  #222 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Between Chippenham and Wooton Bassett
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, if the move for officer training must remove all traces of previous establishments, then why not Milton-Keynes? great rail links, kind of east-central and with few prior incarnations of military dogma to confound the winds of change.

As for flying pay, why not make it a perk for the days when flying actually takes place?

As for ground trades, if there are further reductions, it may be found that certain trades may react unfavourably... PSF might close not just Wednesday afternoon... The flightline may be closed every Thursday afternoon, for groundcrew training... Last minute changes to flight plans or map requests will incur a surcharge... Miracles may cease to be performed at Role change time... And we will most definitely be calling aircrew in from home, to sign the aircraft back in, or to assist with their loose articles...
Photoplanet is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2015, 22:24
  #223 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Darling - where are we?
Posts: 2,580
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
I agree, the good will tank is empty and many of the things on my list would be the final straw for some.

However I refer the honourable gentleman to the second and third order effects I noted in point 9 - if they can force people out early enough it becomes a lot cheaper regarding numbers climbing up the pay scale and future pension liabilities. I would be surprised if that sort of Machiavellian thinking hadn't at least been considered by the Bean Counters already.
Melchett01 is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2015, 22:25
  #224 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Between Chippenham and Wooton Bassett
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote:
with flying pay being abolished for the days when aircrew are not actually flying?
Assuming/hoping this is veiled (albeit poor) attempt at humour, I will add in the interest of accuracy Flying pay no longer exists. To do as you suggest would mean the RAF only want to recruit and retain on days when I/we/you actually fly.

In this day and age not a lot of recruiting and retaining will be done.

_ Why should the public pay for a product or service that they are not receiving? I am in receipt of GYH(M) allowance, but this equates to 2 return journeys per month; it does not assume that I am driving up and down the motorways 24 hours a day, all day and everyday - it represents a realistic usage of public funds.
Photoplanet is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2015, 22:38
  #225 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Between Chippenham and Wooton Bassett
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bear in mind that currently, the SAC who flight services your aircraft gets paid about the same as the SAC who cooks your breakfast (if you are fortunate to still have RAF Chefs)...
Photoplanet is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2015, 23:24
  #226 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Outside the Matz
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Photo, did the SAC who cooked my breakfast also fry the chip on your shoulder?
Bannock is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2015, 23:45
  #227 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Outbound
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Photo,

On days I don't fly, I don't cease to be a pilot; I still have expertise, capability and knowledge hewn from the best part of 2 decades of military flying. The pay is there to retain aircrew; not as "danger pay" for the actual act of flying.

If you're posted into a job that doesn't need to be filled by aircrew, you already lose it. I guess Melchett is suggesting that may happen immediately, rather than the current 2-3 year ramp down via reserve band.

Naturally, as RRP(Fg) is the only thing keeping a lot of aircrew from PVRing, I'm sure we can tell what'd happen; anyone posted to a ground tour would shrug their shoulders and immediately quit...! I know a few people who volunteered for them back in the days of longer reserve banding as "broadening" tours. I know a few who've volunteered for them now, as long as they were short tours and they'd get back to flying before RRP disappeared.

In terms of your realistic use of public funds, the AFPRB have been keeping an eye on pay for aircrew for years, including PAS, and think it's set appropriately. Why do you know better?

I'm getting pretty blasé about this sort of attitude, though. I get paid an allowance based on the fact I need to use my knowledge, expertise and skills as a pilot. If you take it away because you post me to a job that doesn't require those, fair enough. But if you post me to a job that doesn't require the knowledge, skills and expertise I've spent years developing, why would I stay?
5 Forward 6 Back is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2015, 23:49
  #228 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: HOMELESS
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why should the public pay for a product or service that they are not receiving?
Happens all the time. We do not pay NI only for days we use the NHS. I still pay council tax when I am on holiday.

We are aircrew all the time regardless of whether flying or not

New pay scheme (Apr 16) will take care of the SAC Tech and Chef being paid the same(ish)

However, for those eager youngsters who are desperate to fly, I doubt Flying pay is the key driver to their recruitment
May not be the KEY driver, but a significant one. Overall salary package is what counts and for Officers RRP(F) is a good chunk of change. In days of limited hours reducing RRP(F) to only days of flying would be a huge cut in salary.

As for you other points Melchett01, some you raise are likely and some less so IMO.

Deletion of Sentinel from UK capability is one of my favourites to happen, especially if a MMA is on the horizon. Not sure about E3 as the 737 equivalent is not held in high regard from what I here. E-3D could do with an upgrade but there is no money. Reduction in F35 and withdrawal of Tornado earlier than the date it was extended too are also candidates in my book.

Cull of V/VVSO needed but unlikely.
middleground is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2015, 01:44
  #229 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: the earth
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Specialist pay (Flying, Submarine, SF) is always an emotive subject. Whilst I agree that I use those skills to base my decisions on, whether I am in a flying job or a ground job, unfortunately I don't think this carries much weight when you're looking to make massive savings.

The argument for Specialist pay (RRP) is a simple one. If you force people out of the cockpit (thats right they have no choice) and then force a 18% pay cut on them, people will leave. Add to this that its most likely to occur at or around IPP you have a perfect storm. Therefore the cost of RRP is tiny when you compare it to the costs involved in training people to fill your place (which when it comes to experience you can't.)

Just my thoughts.

Last edited by AutoBit; 28th Apr 2015 at 15:08.
AutoBit is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2015, 06:11
  #230 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Darling - where are we?
Posts: 2,580
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
5F6B,

Correct, no reserve band for fg-related posts was indeed what we were thinking amongst other fairly unpalatable scenarios.

As for the 737 AEWC platform not being well thought of, I can't really comment, not my part of the ship, but our thinking was based around the principle that common base platforms would bring savings and synergies - the sort of thing that might appeal to bean counters and VVSOs faced with a decision of that or no capability at all - and that was the position we put ourselves in when doing our thinking - what would the 'enemy' (AKA Bean Counters) do?

One further assumption I should have added at the start of my list: the SDSR won't be strategic and will be based purely on cutting costs for short term gain at the expense of long term capability and sustainability. Again. And when you include that key assumption, then you can see how some of those ideas might appear at least plausible.
Melchett01 is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2015, 07:56
  #231 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: home for good
Posts: 494
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Sadly, I think your number 1 assumption re manning numbers is flawed. No matter what is "promised" now - all will be up for negotiations when coalition talks start.
If by cutting another 20,000 service people the politicians can spend more on the NHS - that is the choice they will undoubtedly make.
I'd suggest all sacred cows will be rounded up for slaughter in the next review (Reds? Ceremonial Guards? London bases? etc etc)
Sandy Parts is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2015, 10:58
  #232 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northumberland
Age: 65
Posts: 748
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Big cuts are coming whoever wins.

I see the subject of Flying Pay is as hot as ever. I can see the arguments both for and against and do not really feel that strongly about either.
However, why do we need all pilots to be commissioned?? The RAF has way too many Officers, especially at the Starred ranks and so is ripe for a cull.
In the longer term why not have SNCO pilots who, in the fullness of time, make up the majority of aircrew?
These would in effect be the same people who would have previously gone down the Cranwell route so no dilution of quality.
Saw a documentary not that long ago that was about Mountain Rescue. Along comes an RAF Sea King with a Sqn Ldr pilot and a Sqn Ldr working the radar/winch. Does not seem that cost effective.
I see no issue with SNCO Typhoon pilots either.
Just a thought. Seemed to work in the late 30s, early 40s................
Wyler is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2015, 11:16
  #233 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Yeovil
Age: 53
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If they implement pay cuts for those above Cpl, stand by for a massive influx of "seven clicks to freedom" from an already disgruntled armed forces.
Junglydaz is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2015, 11:25
  #234 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Midlands
Posts: 745
Received 25 Likes on 8 Posts
Wyler, don't open that particular can of worms Amazing that the AAC can operate a mixed fleet of helicopters that are mainly flown by SNCOs, and the RAF can't.
Stitchbitch is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2015, 11:32
  #235 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Yeovil
Age: 53
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Stitch, not to mention the RN as well. It seems the Senior and Junior Services have always considered that flying helicopters requires a University education AND the knowledge of which knife and fork to use!
Junglydaz is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2015, 11:51
  #236 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,289
Received 608 Likes on 266 Posts
Junglydaz - there were plenty of SNCO pilots when 3BAS existed but when they were subsumed into the RN they had a choice - commission or leave but I don't think many of them rushed off to university or Dartmouth.

As for the AAC - stitchbitch, perhaps you haven't noticed since the introduction of the Apache, the balance has swung very firmly in the direction of officer pilots. And that mixed fleet is soon to be 2 types, Wildcat and AH with a couple of aging Gazelles (if they can keep them serviceable) - and not very many of each either compared to the 90s.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2015, 17:44
  #237 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The real world
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jungly Daz, the 7 clicks to freedom. Where are they going to leave to? the oil industry is on it's knees right now.
It's **** getting pay cuts and not deserved but it's no bed of roses just now beyond the blue suit.
Jayand is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2015, 17:53
  #238 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: england
Age: 58
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A university education has never been required to fly in the RAF.
theonewhoknows is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2015, 20:47
  #239 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: HOMELESS
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jungly Daz, the 7 clicks to freedom. Where are they going to leave to? the oil industry is on it's knees right now.
It's **** getting pay cuts and not deserved but it's no bed of roses just now beyond the blue suit.
There are many options beyond the blue suit. While the Oil/ROV world may be the recent traditional vocation, there are many other options. Many of the the guys and gals are bright, articulate and have skill sets required throughout the civilian world. The question is, does the individual feel valued (one would suggest pay cuts do not add to feeling valued) and is the salary attractive enough to stay.

Flt Lt no RRP(F) +45K v Flt Lt PAS +65K, I would imagine those 7 steps would happen soon enough for one set of those Flt Lt's. All shall become apparent when the review of RRP(F) is carried out in the next year or so.
middleground is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2015, 06:53
  #240 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northumberland
Age: 65
Posts: 748
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Only a very few will get anything like 45K on the outside. I have several firends working in industry who are ex RAF and they are sounding notes of caution to anyone thinking of leaving.
Unless you have very specialised skills and/or some form of commercial pedigree your talents are not nearly as gold plated as you think. Also, if you go into industry, especially the Defence Industry, you more or less have to self fund your salary by bringing business in.
The hours and bullsh!t can be far more than in the service and your contract can be short term and very much performance based.
With more cuts coming, and far bigger then anything we have seen before, I would think very carefully before jumping ship.
As has been said, the grass is certainly not always greener on the outside.
Wyler is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.