Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

UK MFTS on or off the rails?

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.

UK MFTS on or off the rails?

Old 7th Mar 2019, 21:32
  #261 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,090
‘Has it put you off joining?’ is the wrong question; the young and carefree will certainly stick at it in sufficient number to keep the system primed for no other reason than they want to fly. The real crisis is going to come when we have increasing numbers of aircrew reaching their early-mid 30s with only a single tour under their belts. That age is when people’s priorities start to change and mid-career decisions start to be made. With 2 or 3 tours to your name, you have an idea of where you stand in the organisation and whether staying in is the right long-term decision. With only a single tour and less idea where your career is heading, the temptation to leave for pastures new will be so much more attractive. Give it 10 years and see what happens!

Last edited by Easy Street; 8th Mar 2019 at 00:04.
Easy Street is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 22:57
  #262 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 126
Originally Posted by Chris Kebab View Post
So, has it put you off joining?
At the moment, no, because I am single, don't have any children and therefore I have the luxury of being carefree.
I want to fly on operations so at the moment it's worth becoming an A1 certified tea maker. Life always does change though so ask me the same question when I am 2 years in to an indefinite holding period.
BVRAAM is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 06:28
  #263 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: front seat, facing forwards
Posts: 976
Originally Posted by VinRouge View Post
So why is the current IPS output not now at SDSR10 levels if that was the case?

"Innovative" measures.
just another jocky is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 06:48
  #264 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Next door.
Posts: 636
What’s the low down on the T6 Texan II these days, are they ‘mission capable’ yet? Why T6 and not PC21? I ask as two places I’ve visited recently seem to have no problems getting swarms of the things airborne everyday (with the aircrew wearing U.K. AEA to!). Is it purely down to money or is something else happening?
Stitchbitch is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 08:07
  #265 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The back of beyond
Posts: 1,542
I am single, don't have any children and therefore I have the luxury of being carefree.
You utter [email protected]###d!!
melmothtw is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 08:48
  #266 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 126
Originally Posted by Stitchbitch View Post
What’s the low down on the T6 Texan II these days, are they ‘mission capable’ yet? Why T6 and not PC21? I ask as two places I’ve visited recently seem to have no problems getting swarms of the things airborne everyday (with the aircrew wearing U.K. AEA to!). Is it purely down to money or is something else happening?
They are flying now. It's a beautiful aeroplane IMO!
BVRAAM is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 10:32
  #267 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 831
Originally Posted by BVRAAM View Post
They are flying now. It's a beautiful aeroplane IMO!
Beautiful? It looks like a squidged Tucano, as seen in a Disney movie about aeroplanes. ;-)

SATCOS WHIPPING BOY is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 10:45
  #268 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,908
Originally Posted by just another jocky View Post
"Innovative" measures.

Its not very innovative to be unable to deliver on contract. Indeed, contracts involving MoD seem to have this unnerving quality on a recurrent basis. In my opinion due to a complete lack of accountability, and the nonsense that is 2 year command tours.

Programs like this this should be taken from cradle to delivery by a single responsible owner. If we used relevant experience, rather than throwing people on MSP/ six sigma courses and pretending the generalist development approach we seem to follow (despite being a technologically advanced organisation requiring depth of knowledge In programme management) works, guess this will happen time and time again. The prime contractor was warned , yet seemed to be happy cracking on.
VinRouge is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 11:32
  #269 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 175
MFTS does seem to be degenerating doesnt it, both in terms of delivery shortcomings and the resulting commercial relationship - pretty much in the way that quite a few (old timers!) on here had been forecasting it would.

I do agree that simply throwing rocks at ASCENT is massively oversimplifying the issues at hand. The accountability (the buck) still stops with MoD (PE) or whatever they are called these days, regardless of the shortcomings of their chosen delivery partner.

Fundamentally the current situation has come about by a misguided attempt to simultaneously modernise and strip out cost of Flying Training. So whereas previously we had a flying training system that was (arguably) the envy of the world it did come at a cost and also was facing quite acute recapitalisation challenges. Further coupled with the ever changing face of modern warfare you can kind of see why some relatively clever, career minded professionals, decided that MFTS had legs.

All sounds good so far, however the next step is where I imagine it started to unravel. This is the bit where the "cost challenge" is laid down and instead of working to a, for arguments sake, 10% cut on the headline costs of the legacy system you are then told it has to be 40%. Cue a load of headscratching, from which said professionals declare that what is being asked for is impossible, i.e. no way it is possible to save 40%, recapatilise the fleet and modernise the syllabus all at the same time. Next they get told they have no choice they will "have to make it fit" so, and this is the clever bit, a set of assumptions are documented, e.g. assume that student pilot numbers will remain at 2010 levels for the next 25yrs, assume that International Training requirements will decline over next 25yrs, assume that availability rate of Texan II will be 99.999% for next 25yrs, assume that MPA capability will not be required for next 25yrs, assume that outflow rates will remain at Y% per annum for next 25yrs, etc, etc

If all of those assumptions (and many more) would have held true then maybe this MFTS malarkey would have stood a chance, but as soon as those assumptions started to change then an already marginal delivery plan suddenly becomes a worthless pile of garbage. Then you have to find somebody senior with an ounce of gumption to go and tell the DefSec that MFTS is dead on its feet, then he has to listen, then DefSec gets replaced, then the VSO moves on, etc, etc

Eventually you end up where we seem to be today where all the poorly chickens come home to roost....

The only thing likely to dramatically alter prospects in the long term is to throw more money at it
andrewn is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2019, 17:07
  #270 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Posts: 656
Radio 4 File on Four .. On now.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_radio_fourfm
cargosales is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2019, 17:52
  #271 (permalink)  

Lead on...
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
Posts: 83
Depressing

Originally Posted by cargosales View Post
It was a seriously depressing programme. I suspect that the MOD, like many Government departments with large projects, managed to screw it up, but that the contractor was not up to the job anyway. Talking of large projects for Government departments, how is Brexit going?
McDuff is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2019, 20:36
  #272 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: at the behest of the Queen of Canada.
Posts: 790
The Air Ranking Officer didn't sound convincing...at.all…..
Hueymeister is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2019, 21:58
  #273 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 70
Posts: 15,842
RAF copying the USN?





SASless is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 07:25
  #274 (permalink)  

Lead on...
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
Posts: 83
Clueless?

Originally Posted by Hueymeister View Post
The Air Ranking Officer didn't sound convincing...at.all…..
No. But I felt no sympathy: he has presumably subscribed to the whole RAF/MOD system out of which this fiasco has developed.

McDuff is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 09:48
  #275 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: France
Age: 75
Posts: 6,226
How do you expect MFTS to work if they cannot even keep air cadet gliding on the go........just asking
Wander00 is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 09:48
  #276 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 709
According to the R4 interview a number of military pilots are now completing multi engine training at a civil provider down in Bournemouth? So these somewhat pissed off young people who have been kept waiting years for pilot training are now at a civil school where they can quietly pay to take their civil licences in parallel with the RAF course......

In next years news RAF suffers outflow of freshly trained first tour pilots to civil aviation?
Bigpants is online now  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 09:50
  #277 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 709
Management Competence

Originally Posted by Wander00 View Post
How do you expect MFTS to work if they cannot even keep air cadet gliding on the go........just asking
Oh that....hoped you had all forgotten about it?
Bigpants is online now  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 09:51
  #278 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Posts: 656
Originally Posted by McDuff View Post


No. But I felt no sympathy: he has presumably subscribed to the whole RAF/MOD system out of which this fiasco has developed.

Agreed .. maybe. He sounded neither convincing nor convinced about the system.

cargosales is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 10:50
  #279 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK (and now rarely behind enemy lines but still enjoying foreign climes.)
Posts: 1,337
Originally Posted by cargosales View Post
He sounded neither convincing nor convinced about the system.
He sounded precisely like the 'politician' that he is, avoiding answering the questions being asked. The business-speak drivel coming out of his mouth was embarrassing.

Furthermore, Ascent's own website is replete with nonsense like "Delivering a world class Military Flying Training System" and "Delivering excellence." What tosh! MFTS is little more than the usual PFI-type stuff - an opportunity for some folks to put their hands in the taxpayers pocket and deliver not-a-lot.
MrBernoulli is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 11:02
  #280 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 320
Originally Posted by Bigpants View Post
According to the R4 interview a number of military pilots are now completing multi engine training at a civil provider down in Bournemouth? So these somewhat pissed off young people who have been kept waiting years for pilot training are now at a civil school where they can quietly pay to take their civil licences in parallel with the RAF course......

In next years news RAF suffers outflow of freshly trained first tour pilots to civil aviation?
Indeed. Congratulations to MFTS for single-handedly solving the current airline pilot 'shortage'.
jez d is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.