Forces braced for more cuts .....

[tucumseh]

Leon

I saw your earlier comment about SQEP and SQeP! Couldn't agree more. Interestingly, MoD has always refused to define "Experienced". It did define "inexperience" however, back in about 1997. For example, managing, not just working on, 120 projects is not sufficient to warrant any promotion in (at the time) MoD(PE). Same XD1 2 Star, when he was DGAS2. An MP wrote to Minister and asked how many in AbbeyWood satisfied that criteria (asked in the context of another fatal accident, where a non-technical officer had overruled a safety critical design decision, leaving the aircraft unsafe). MoD refused to reply.

[Martin the Martian]

You're all wrong. Michael Fallon has declared 2017 as the Year of the Royal Navy:

New ships for Royal Navy as Britain enters new era of maritime power | UK | News | Daily Express

Presumably the RAF and the Army will be disbanded so that it can all be afforded.

[A and C]

Can't you all see the money needs to be saved to pay for the lawyers who are digging around in the past to try to prosecute ex members of the armed forces................ it's a very lucrative business I'm told.

[Lima Juliet]

^^^Reference the Express link above

What utter drivel. I thought we were making a law about peddling so-called fake news? There is no announcement about any new ships (all the ones mentioned were ordered ages ago), the Merlin Crowsnest is hardly going to project power and the so-called top secret detection array is so hush-hush in its submarine detection capability that we have released its capabilities in a newspaper!

If that's the best we can peddle as a positive story then how about making some savings in the various media and comms departments...

Happy New Year

LJ

[Heathrow Harry]

Put out so they can refer to their "previous statement of our enhanced capabilities"

Pure b*******

[Chugalug2]

Leon:-

things won't get any better until we "drain that swamp" and start investing in our people again.

Amen to that, but I would reiterate that the "Swamp" was created by RAF VSOs deliberately breaching the dykes that protected UK Military Air Safety (ie its ring fenced budget), ordering the suborning of the regs, and ridding themselves of all those skilled and experienced Engineers (ie the SQEPs that you mention) who would not comply. The RAF and the MOD have to acknowledge that happened, and ensure (by making the UK Military Air Regulator and Air Accident Investigator independent of the MOD and of each other) that it cannot happen again. No amount of "draining" will ensure that, for the swamp will merely return at the whim of some ambitious VSO(s), of which there is no shortage.

[tucumseh]

the Merlin Crowsnest is hardly going to project power

I'd be interested to know just how much duplication of effort (waste) has occurred here. If one were to dig out the drawings presented at the 1994 bidders' conference for AEW Radar System Upgrade, one would see a helicopter that looked remarkably like a Merlin. It was the only compliant bid and won the competition by a mile.

[Wyler]

It is a complete and utter farce. There are several 'evaluations' going on in tandem and the the parties involved do not seem to be talking to each other. You have 22Gp trying to consolidate Phase 2 Trg establishments but 1Gp is also trying to trim real estate whilst maintaining output. There are several areas of commonality yet they are working in almost complete isolation of each other.
I have had to sit through 3 presentations that have highlighted a complete lack of joined up thinking, specialist knowledge and an absence of Leadership.
The RAF is being treated like a Company and it is being run by Managers. We ceased to be a credible fighting force a long time ago and we now seem to be on a headlong descent into Global irrelevance.
If Trump starts to ease away from NATO we are well and truly screwed.

[Melchett01]

The RAF is being treated like a Company and it is being run by Managers. We ceased to be a credible fighting force a long time ago and we now seem to be on a headlong descent into Global irrelevance

Returning to the PPRuNe frey after Christmas and it makes for pretty depressing reading. I think Wyler hit the nail firmly on the head with this observation, and it's most definitely for the worst as it has turned what for many of us when we joined far too long ago was a calling and a way of life into a job. By running it as a business with a bottom line, people just see it as another job in a long term career and will either walk when the job ceases to hold any attraction or will just view it as a 9-5 job forgetting what we are actually here for i.e. the goodwill tank that we rely on to compensate the lack of investment and sees people going above and beyond is now empty. If that sounds harsh, some of the Pain & Grief statements I've read in recent years about why people can't deploy would either make you laugh or cry depending on your outlook - my girlfriend can't drive and it will disrupt my property management business being 2 of the more memorable ones - really do point towards the lack of high level commitment having a corrosive effect right through the organization.

Incidentally, if we were a company with a bottom line, would we be bankrupt or subject to take over?

[Wyler]

Funnily enough one of the presentations I sat through covered the subject of experience and long term commitment. Basically, the RAF is gearing up to provide lots of choice, the ability to change stream completely at certain points and an acceptance that it is a short term job for most.
I have a certain amount of sympathy as it does in a way just reflect today's society but, on the other hand, it is also indicative of the RAF's passion to be a'trend setter' and socially aware.
Either way we will soon be like a lot of our European allies: wear civvies to work, no messes, no SFA and (god forbid) wear a hairnet.....

[Heathrow Harry]

"The RAF is being treated like a Company and it is being run by Managers."

Because we can't think of any other way to run anything.

Exactly what you'd expect when neither the Civil Service nor the politicians have any experience of all-out war. Even those who didn't serve had family members who did - or neighbours or friends. It's now 72 years since WW2 and nearly 60 since National Service was abolished - there is absolutely no national understanding of what is required by the Armed Forces and those who serve in them - just more management speak that comes straight from an MBA course or the latest self-help book.

[alfred_the_great]

Originally Posted by Wyler

Funnily enough one of the presentations I sat through covered the subject of experience and long term commitment. Basically, the RAF is gearing up to provide lots of choice, the ability to change stream completely at certain points and an acceptance that it is a short term job for most.
I have a certain amount of sympathy as it does in a way just reflect today's society but, on the other hand, it is also indicative of the RAF's passion to be a'trend setter' and socially aware.
Either way we will soon be like a lot of our European allies: wear civvies to work, no messes, no SFA and (god forbid) wear a hairnet.....

That's because it is a short term job for most. I doubt the average length of Service in the RAF is much beyond 5 or 6 years.

[downsizer]

ATG

Figures I saw recently put it at 12yrs.

[superplum]

I wonder how much my 40yrs influenced those averages?

[downsizer]

I think the average will drop over the next decade or so; as what little sweeteners to counterbalance the less palatable elements are further eroded.

[The B Word]

In 2015 the average length of service in 2015 for the AFPS presentation was 9 years overall. Big spikes at 4years and 22 years.



Although that is for ALL Armed Forces, for the RAF the intake/outflow from the same figures look like:



So the spike is still around 6-9 years

[skippedonce]

Incidentally, if we were a company with a bottom line, would we be bankrupt or subject to take over?

What's the value of junk bonds?

[Whenurhappy]

The first time I encountered SQEP was when I audited nuclear matters at HMNB Clyde in the 1990s. Fast forward to c 1998 and I introduced the term in what became part of the H-C report. I was called in by a fierce ACAS of the time (Timmo) and asked, in an extremely peremptory manner, to 'define' SQEP.

[dervish]

I was called in by a fierce ACAS of the time (Timmo) and asked, in an extremely peremptory manner, to 'define' SQEP.

Is that the same officer who became head of MAA? No conflict of interest there then.

[Heathrow Harry]

Maybe, like B&Q, the RAF should hire people over 55..............................