SDSR rumours.
The trouble with a high turnover of younger servicemen is that it is murderously expensive. The length of training vs return becomes disproportionate, the balance of those in training or instructing vs productive degrades FE@R or requires a manning uplift.
When it comes to aircrew you have to factor in more training aircraft and more OCU aircraft too. We already have fleets that cannot train enough quickly enough to cover their normal loss rate (eg Sentry), so these fleets would simply cease to exist.
The old and bold are cheap and are partially self-funding as they are not drawing their pension or EDP. Sadly a lot of fleets are already diluted and struggle to fill the traditional supervisor and instructional posts.
When it comes to aircrew you have to factor in more training aircraft and more OCU aircraft too. We already have fleets that cannot train enough quickly enough to cover their normal loss rate (eg Sentry), so these fleets would simply cease to exist.
The old and bold are cheap and are partially self-funding as they are not drawing their pension or EDP. Sadly a lot of fleets are already diluted and struggle to fill the traditional supervisor and instructional posts.
The trouble with a high turnover of younger servicemen is that it is murderously expensive. The length of training vs return becomes disproportionate, the balance of those in training or instructing vs productive degrades FE@R or requires a manning uplift
You're basing your argument on logic and long term thinking, neither of which feature in many politicians' calculus. Especially the current lot's thinking which actually mirrors society very well in its desire for instant gratification and an attempt to look good despite the reality of the situation.
In effect, we have a Facebook government for a Facebook generation. Don't be surprised if they haven't considered the long term implications, they're more concerned about getting to the next level on Angry Birds.
JTO,
You aright on the money there. I was warning about this just about ten years ago, but a troublesome SO1 raising issues was not what was needed despite being able to prove the looming problem mathematically. A year later it was starting to happen. Now it's pretty much irrecoverable.
The FAA fixed wing cadre in isolation is going to face a nightmare, a product of the same decade of decay and the gap between Har and F-35. Will the RAF be called upon to fill the supervisory and dilution gaps? I think their problems in those areas are already bordering on crisis.
You aright on the money there. I was warning about this just about ten years ago, but a troublesome SO1 raising issues was not what was needed despite being able to prove the looming problem mathematically. A year later it was starting to happen. Now it's pretty much irrecoverable.
The FAA fixed wing cadre in isolation is going to face a nightmare, a product of the same decade of decay and the gap between Har and F-35. Will the RAF be called upon to fill the supervisory and dilution gaps? I think their problems in those areas are already bordering on crisis.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Outside the Matz
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
David Cameron: We will defeat terrorism, and the poisonous ideology that fuels it - Telegraph
From the horses mouth -
"And we will invest in nine maritime patrol aircraft to protect our nuclear deterrent, hunt down hostile submarines and enhance our maritime search and rescue. Not one of these capabilities is an optional extra or an act of vanity. These investments are an act of clear-eyed self-interest to ensure our prosperity and security."
From the horses mouth -
"And we will invest in nine maritime patrol aircraft to protect our nuclear deterrent, hunt down hostile submarines and enhance our maritime search and rescue. Not one of these capabilities is an optional extra or an act of vanity. These investments are an act of clear-eyed self-interest to ensure our prosperity and security."
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Outside the Matz
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, 9 x P-8, plus the two new Typhoon squadrons, plus the AESA upgrade.
Ok, so that's the good news. I'm genuinely happy. Although I would argue that we are merely repairing some of the damage from SDSR 2010.
Now, I am also genuinely cautious. How are we going to be shafted to pay for it all?
Now, I am also genuinely cautious. How are we going to be shafted to pay for it all?
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, the Army appear to be shuffling cap badges (read cuts) and the Royal Navy are probably wondering about the size of the Type 26 fleet.
RAF - There's a hint that Sentinel will go (AESA) which isn't really unexpected.
RAF - There's a hint that Sentinel will go (AESA) which isn't really unexpected.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sky News is reporting P-8s to be based at RAF Lossiemouth! If true, that would be a real shame not to co-locate at the ISTAR 'hub'. - I'm sure the Kinloss die-hards will disagree though.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"High turnover of young servicemen murderously expensive.."?? really?.. Why is it cheaper to train someone "old and bold" to fly a P8 or Voyager when a bright-eyed youngster could sit in the seat on less than half the pay? Not saying this is the right thing, JTO but can you justify your statement on financial grounds?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 144 Likes
on
28 Posts
So, 2 Typhoon sqns, say 15 pilots in each, plus the 24 crews for the P8, another 48 pilots plus 24 WSOs..... Don't forget the ground crew to maintain these ac, which are of course legion.
MFTS is going to have to earn its money training up all these pilots & WSOs are going to have to be magicked from somewhere.
Let's hope the cuts side of the seesaw to balance the spending isn't too harsh on T&Cs otherwise there might be a bit of a problem.
MFTS is going to have to earn its money training up all these pilots & WSOs are going to have to be magicked from somewhere.
Let's hope the cuts side of the seesaw to balance the spending isn't too harsh on T&Cs otherwise there might be a bit of a problem.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, who is going to man them?
Some of the back seaters could definitely come from the RN, we have lots of experienced operators, though the P8 tech is rather behind the Merlin.
Front seat?
Well, the RN has about 3 current maritime fixed wing pilots.....
Some of the back seaters could definitely come from the RN, we have lots of experienced operators, though the P8 tech is rather behind the Merlin.
Front seat?
Well, the RN has about 3 current maritime fixed wing pilots.....
There's big manning rumours now of problems and getting worse.
As I understand, manning are unable to fill QFI slots at the moment, and I know of several leaving over the coming weeks.
I'm not sure what's gone wrong and when, but for one, I'm definitely fatigued of Ops ( with no end in sight) and the pension change was a big killer for me.
The phrase 'nibbled to death by ducks' comes into mind with the RAF.
That said, I've had a mainly wonderful 17 years, but sadly my time is up.
As I understand, manning are unable to fill QFI slots at the moment, and I know of several leaving over the coming weeks.
I'm not sure what's gone wrong and when, but for one, I'm definitely fatigued of Ops ( with no end in sight) and the pension change was a big killer for me.
The phrase 'nibbled to death by ducks' comes into mind with the RAF.
That said, I've had a mainly wonderful 17 years, but sadly my time is up.
"High turnover of young servicemen murderously expensive.."?? really?.. Why is it cheaper to train someone "old and bold" to fly a P8 or Voyager when a bright-eyed youngster could sit in the seat on less than half the pay? Not saying this is the right thing, JTO but can you justify your statement on financial grounds?
Option 1: Fill requirement with pilots serving for no longer than 10 years.
- Allow for 3 years in training / non-productive
- Expect 7 years productive per pilot = 4 pilots required
- 4 pilots at £4M each (not an accurate figure) = £16M training bill
Option 2: Fill requirement and retain pilot for 31 years.
- Allow for 3 years in training / non-productive
- Expect 28 years productive = 1 pilot required.
- 1 pilot at £4M each (as above) = £4M training bill
1 pilot option 'saves' £12M over 28 years.
Or put another way, you could pay that pilot £428,571.42 a year and still save a few pence, even if the other 4 pilots were willing to work 10 years for free.
An extreme example no doubt, but high churn is resource and cash intensive.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But does it really cost £4million to train a P8 or Voyager pilot JTO? I deliberately left F35 out since that's outside my field but my employer was involved in training some current RAF Voyager pilots and the bill didn't come to even a small fraction of £4 million. In any case your 28 year pilot (really?) still needs training up on P8/330/F35 which you haven't costed.
Have the services EVER strived for retention? Im not saying it's right, by the way but we used to have National Service pilots and that's back in what many here would call the good old days.
Have the services EVER strived for retention? Im not saying it's right, by the way but we used to have National Service pilots and that's back in what many here would call the good old days.
Shotone
I believe the 4 million rough cost is from IOT to Wings ( maybe completion of first OCU)
When you factor in recruitment costs, Officer training costs, hold, medical, dental, accommodation, pilot training etc etc it does add up very quickly!!!!
Each OCU does obviously cost money, there's no getting away from that.
But simply, if you get 20+ years out of one initial recruitment and training cost, that's alot more cost effective.
Not to mention the experience that's retained, and thus safety.
I believe the 4 million rough cost is from IOT to Wings ( maybe completion of first OCU)
When you factor in recruitment costs, Officer training costs, hold, medical, dental, accommodation, pilot training etc etc it does add up very quickly!!!!
Each OCU does obviously cost money, there's no getting away from that.
But simply, if you get 20+ years out of one initial recruitment and training cost, that's alot more cost effective.
Not to mention the experience that's retained, and thus safety.
Not to mention the experience that's retained, and thus safety.
