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.

Phenom

Old 20th Sep 2018, 16:01
  #161 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: front seat, facing forwards
Posts: 1,018
Originally Posted by typerated View Post
Perhaps doing a year as a AEF pilot might be a decent hold?
Indeed, lots of hours!
just another jocky is offline  
Old 20th Sep 2018, 16:31
  #162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Bristol
Age: 37
Posts: 312
Originally Posted by just another jocky View Post
Indeed, lots of hours!
I recall the younger AEF pilots being a little less relaxed in the cockpit with cadets - even the week in and week out staff cadets like me. I guess the younger pilots feel the responsibility a little more keenly.
unmanned_droid is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2018, 11:40
  #163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Leeds
Age: 66
Posts: 7
A friend's son has just graduated as Sgt Aircrew (aka WSOp) and has no idea where he is going next with regards to streaming. I hear on the grapevine that this may be related to a rumor that current WSOp training at Shawbury has been suspended TFN (anyone confirm or deny this?). It would seem that it is not just the Pilot pipeline that is suffering.
cheifofdefence is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2018, 12:31
  #164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Axminster Devon
Age: 79
Posts: 153
Unmanned Droid I recall the younger AEF pilots being a little less relaxed in the cockpit with cadets - even the week in and week out staff cadets like me. I guess the younger pilots feel the responsibility a little more keenly.
When I joined the AEF system in 1978, I had fairly recently been a Vulcan captain with all that implied in the Cold War. The Chipmunk role, in the event that Cold went a bit Hot, was in support of the civil power - meaning flying policemen around Yorkshire.I do not think we had holding pilots on the Flight then. So it greatly irritated me that we old hairies had no planned part in the war role and that students and/or newly-qualifieds were to be shipped from Valley to man the aircraft. Of course we flew the test or practice sorties, as it obviously made no sense to bring the youngsters in just to do that.
rlsbutler is online now  
Old 21st Sep 2018, 17:26
  #165 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London
Age: 63
Posts: 290
You will only get holding pilots flying on the AEFs if they have reached wings standard, as you need to be QSP to carry passengers (gliders aside); unless it's changed, there was a 400hr TT requirement as well. And given that most of them will only have managed 5-10 hours solo time, I'm not sure I would want my children flying with them!
Fortissimo is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2018, 21:46
  #166 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: U.K.
Age: 42
Posts: 160
Phenom as an initial ME trainer

If youíll forgive a civvie butting in, I have just completed an Embraer 145 type rating. I have a question re the suitability of the Phenom as a ME trainer. I have quite a lot of hours in traditional multi-engine pistons and turbo-prop airliners. In comparison with, for example, an ATR, the ERJ seems to me, as a tail jet, a lot easier to keep control in EFATO senarios, (in one sim session my initial tbought was ĎIt canít be an engjne failure, itís too easyí until I looked at the engjne instruments) So, is a tail jet (and I assume the asymmetric effect is even less in a smaller aircraft like the Phenom?) actually demanding enough (purely in the asymmetric charactristics sense - Iím not thinking about putting a student into a fairly high performance aircraft, which I guess the military are wont to do) for an initial ME trainer?
EDIT: Yes, obviously I didnít do my intial ME training on an ATR, but I would have thought the previously used Kingair a much better aircraft to teach the basic skills, while having the degree of relative complexity and performance a military training programe might need (I assume) as well as being a pretty tough aircraft.

Last edited by Jump Complete; 21st Sep 2018 at 22:06. Reason: Typoís, clarification.
Jump Complete is offline  
Old 22nd Sep 2018, 08:26
  #167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 7,216
The phenom is not suitable for the role. Replacing the Kingairs with new ones would have been the better choice.
S-Works is offline  
Old 22nd Sep 2018, 08:41
  #168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Uranus
Posts: 819
Or the DA42 that pretty much every ME training school is operating these days. Oddly enough this is what the RAF ME students will be learning on with the contract with L3 at Bournemouth.
The B Word is offline  
Old 22nd Sep 2018, 08:45
  #169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Uranus
Posts: 819
Originally Posted by cheifofdefence View Post
A friend's son has just graduated as Sgt Aircrew (aka WSOp) and has no idea where he is going next with regards to streaming. I hear on the grapevine that this may be related to a rumor that current WSOp training at Shawbury has been suspended TFN (anyone confirm or deny this?). It would seem that it is not just the Pilot pipeline that is suffering.
Yes, I have heard a similar rumour. In fact, the only thing that is alleged to be working as advertised is the legacy Tutor course and the ME training that has been outsourced!
The B Word is offline  
Old 22nd Sep 2018, 09:23
  #170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: France
Age: 75
Posts: 6,339
Multi engine training - bring back the Canberra T4. That'll larn them
Wander00 is offline  
Old 22nd Sep 2018, 09:34
  #171 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Uranus
Posts: 819
Surely it is time for the NAO to come and have another look - I don’t see much more progress since their last report 3 years ago?

https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/up...g-Training.pdf
The B Word is offline  
Old 22nd Sep 2018, 12:51
  #172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: West of Suez
Posts: 243
Pardon another civvie if you please....

I seem to recall that this whole business of using contractors to provide training was branded as cost saving/good economy ?

So, how does it tick when it takes 8 years, as stated in an earlier post, to get to a FJ squadron ? It seems to be agreed that potential aircrew are 'holding' for inordinately longer periods as a consequence of the inflexible training system. Surely the additional cost of 'holding' ought to be factored against any claimed MFTS savings.

This just seems to be another exercise for making money, like Airtanker.

I'm sure it would be a relatively simple accounting exercise to prove that this new training business does not give value for the taxpayer.
AnglianAV8R is offline  
Old 22nd Sep 2018, 14:02
  #173 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the edge
Posts: 234
Last time I checked, Airtanker seemed to be delivering on their contract though....
Arty Fufkin is offline  
Old 22nd Sep 2018, 14:03
  #174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 74
Posts: 5,234
Non-aircrew, long retired, but agree entirely!

Fuzzy accounting with things stowed in different budgets? Whichever, it seems horrendously slow and inefficient.
MPN11 is online now  
Old 22nd Sep 2018, 17:14
  #175 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Uranus
Posts: 819
Originally Posted by Arty Fufkin View Post
Last time I checked, Airtanker seemed to be delivering on their contract though....
They may be, but from what I hear it is not delivering ‘value for money’...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ts-abroad.html

Comment by LORD DANNATT, former Army head

Buying something you couldn’t really afford was taken to a new level in the 1990s under the Private Finance Initiative.

The government of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown seized on the concept to produce shiny new schools and hospitals across the country, especially in marginal constituencies.

But the Voyager PFI deal has to rank as the worst of the lot. Even at face value, £10.5 billion to lease 14 aircraft does not seem like value for money.

The project was led not by an RAF officer, but by an Army brigadier, so that there was no undue service bias.

But this brigadier was so alarmed at the way it was going that he came to me in 2008, while I was Chief of the General Staff, to ask if I could try to get this deal stopped.

I asked for a briefing, having been told there were much cheaper ways to meet the RAF’s air-to-air refuelling and strategic lift requirement.

At the briefing, all other options were dismissed for one spurious reason or another, leading to the curious conclusion that the £10.5 billion procurement of 14 A330 airliners, assembled at Airbus Industrie’s factory near Madrid, was the answer.

In the end, the politics of European industrial collaboration was the winner, the MoD was the loser, and now bucket-and-spade holiday-makers are travelling to sunny places overseas at British taxpayers’ expense. Is that value for money?

Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson’s Modernising Defence Programme must put a stop to scandals like this.
Or this analysis: https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2013/...g-out-of-fsta/

Last edited by The B Word; 22nd Sep 2018 at 17:39.
The B Word is offline  
Old 22nd Sep 2018, 18:04
  #176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: West of Suez
Posts: 243
Originally Posted by Arty Fufkin View Post
Last time I checked, Airtanker seemed to be delivering on their contract though....
Indeed so, but I wonder what it would cost us to fit the gubbins they need to refuel E3, RJ, C17 and P8 ?

Is it not also the case that we are restrained from using A400 as a refueller under the Airtanker contractual agreement? If so, who ever signed up to that certainly didn't look after the interests of the taxpayer.

It seems that military procurement is a process designed to serve the interests of industry first and foremost. If the folks at the sharp end get a decent bit of kit or service, that's a bonus.
AnglianAV8R is offline  
Old 23rd Sep 2018, 09:43
  #177 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: France
Age: 75
Posts: 6,339
PFI - an off balance sheet scam which if pursued by a public company would certainly attract serious criticism. (IMHO of course)
Wander00 is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2018, 10:18
  #178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 622
Talked to a front line FJ pilot recently. Very nice chap indeed. 10/10 for being an excellent ambassador for the RAF. I must be getting old...cos he didn't look old enough!
On his first tour with a current FJ squadron. In his first year of his tour and he's been in the RAF for 9 years. Straight through the training system (Tutor/Tucano/Hawk/OCU) with no Instructional tour.
He was happy to talk about hours/month. Hugely enthusiastic about his role/mount. Discussed his future. Thoroughly nice young man.
Treble one is offline  
Old 27th Sep 2018, 12:37
  #179 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,075
Saw this on Ascents LinkedIn page

‘Congrats to all the Team at RAF Cranwell!


The first student pilots graduated from Elementary Flying

Training (EFT) on 23 Aug 18 marking another momentous achievement for No 3Flying Training School (3FTS) and the new Flying Training System under UKMFTS. This followed several other exciting firsts in recent months; the opening of new training facilities at Cranwell and Barkston Heath in January, in April the first student pilots took to the skies and the first student Prefect solo was flown in May

chopper2004 is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2018, 04:43
  #180 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 14
So, is there any truth to the rumour that the Phenom is a Cat 5?

Also, how many aviators in this forum would categorise 2 aircraft unintentionally touching each other in flight as 'Perceived severity - Medium' to flight safety?
Typhoondriver 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.