Heads Up! Fighter Pilot: The Real Top Gun
Did a stude actually say it had taken NINE years to get form attestation to Valley - is that all I the training machine or is he a transfer fro another branch or commissioned from airman service. If true makes a nonsense of the age limitations for entry to aircrew training
Jindabyne,
I stand by what I said as it is factual. We never had to do it for real, and there was never any risk of having to do it for real.
That is not the case today, so why on earth you think that attitude contemptible is beyond me.
Sorry if you can’t handle the truth,
I stand by what I said as it is factual. We never had to do it for real, and there was never any risk of having to do it for real.
That is not the case today, so why on earth you think that attitude contemptible is beyond me.
Sorry if you can’t handle the truth,
That is in no way meant to trivialise what current men and women in the front line now do - and TBH as an ex driver, F-4, Air Defence, with a vague understanding of a B-Scope , I'd give my right thingy 'ollcky thing to have a go in the F-35.
Last edited by wiggy; 23rd Aug 2019 at 21:45.
never for real ..... never any risk ...
...
Dear Pr oo ne,
I’m fascinated …. I wasn’t in the RAF, and it would take me a while to assemble a proper list, but ….. OTTOMH I can’t think of a single year since 1945 when some of our military aviators were not facing a real risk of being shot at or having to shoot up some other SOB, with the purpose of making him die for his country, rather than our guys dying for mine (and yours.)
Even if there was no actual shooting, surely you cannot be unaware that many more of our chaps ‘died for our country’ just practicing for the actualite.
It doesn’t really matter what they thought when they volunteered (or were conscripted), by the time they were qualified, most of them would have realised what might happen during their service, and continued serving in that clear knowledge. The few who did not like that thought, were sensible and left. And my great respect to them for doing so.
So please forgive me for suggesting that you (you did write “we” - and “there was never any risk”) must have had a very sheltered “-RAF FJ” (your profile claim) existence.
Knowing (by honest and/or genuine repute, if not personally) several of the chaps you are word-jousting with, as a matter of honour, I really could not let this history-jousting go without some kind of challenge.
So could I please politely inquire as to what time scale or “-RAF FJ” position you had in mind for your “fact” that “we” (whoever you are) “never had to do it for real, and there was never any risk of having to do it for real.”
Yours respectfully, .......... LFH
nb crossed with wiggy and LB - same sentiments.
...
I stand by what I said as it is factual. We never had to do it for real, and there was never any risk of having to do it for real. About pr00ne - Biography - Ex-RAF FJ driver turned lawyer
I’m fascinated …. I wasn’t in the RAF, and it would take me a while to assemble a proper list, but ….. OTTOMH I can’t think of a single year since 1945 when some of our military aviators were not facing a real risk of being shot at or having to shoot up some other SOB, with the purpose of making him die for his country, rather than our guys dying for mine (and yours.)
Even if there was no actual shooting, surely you cannot be unaware that many more of our chaps ‘died for our country’ just practicing for the actualite.
It doesn’t really matter what they thought when they volunteered (or were conscripted), by the time they were qualified, most of them would have realised what might happen during their service, and continued serving in that clear knowledge. The few who did not like that thought, were sensible and left. And my great respect to them for doing so.
So please forgive me for suggesting that you (you did write “we” - and “there was never any risk”) must have had a very sheltered “-RAF FJ” (your profile claim) existence.
Knowing (by honest and/or genuine repute, if not personally) several of the chaps you are word-jousting with, as a matter of honour, I really could not let this history-jousting go without some kind of challenge.
So could I please politely inquire as to what time scale or “-RAF FJ” position you had in mind for your “fact” that “we” (whoever you are) “never had to do it for real, and there was never any risk of having to do it for real.”
Yours respectfully, .......... LFH
nb crossed with wiggy and LB - same sentiments.
...
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
May I remind some of the people on this thread that the RAF isn't just fast-jets? Some people (rotary come to mind) have been "doing it for real" for many years.
Incidentally, I believe that since 1.4.1918 there has never been a day when the RAF were not on active service somewhere in the world. A record to be proud of, whatever role.
Incidentally, I believe that since 1.4.1918 there has never been a day when the RAF were not on active service somewhere in the world. A record to be proud of, whatever role.
.Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I loved the programme, it was awesome.
I love the F-35, it's a stunning jet. My only complaint is they have not shown anything relating to Typhoon training - there are two frontline jets in the RAF, showing only one is biased.
As for calling an instructor "mate," consider that the holds are so long, there's simply no such thing as a Fg Off turning up to Valley, anymore. They're all Flt Lts/Lts and the majority of the pilots instructing at Valley, are themselves, Flt Lts/Lts, so from a seniority point of view, they're on the same level...
I love the F-35, it's a stunning jet. My only complaint is they have not shown anything relating to Typhoon training - there are two frontline jets in the RAF, showing only one is biased.
As for calling an instructor "mate," consider that the holds are so long, there's simply no such thing as a Fg Off turning up to Valley, anymore. They're all Flt Lts/Lts and the majority of the pilots instructing at Valley, are themselves, Flt Lts/Lts, so from a seniority point of view, they're on the same level...
BVRAAM - it could get really silly at nav school when I was going through. Not only did we have to address all instructing staff as "sir", this applied irrespective of rank. So you would get the crazy situation of a flying officer student nav calling his flying officer staff pilot "sir" while the sergeant FE who flew on the Varsity addressed his pilot as Fred (or whatever). We also had a flight lieutenant stude on my course who was expected to address the flying officer educator who took us for maths revision as "sir". On reflection it might have been better if we had all called each other "mate"!
Wiggy, Herod - quite right, I like many others was 'doing it for real' in Northern Ireland for many years while the RAFG warriors were enjoying their duty free petrol and cars
BVRAAM - it could get really silly at nav school when I was going through. Not only did we have to address all instructing staff as "sir", this applied irrespective of rank. So you would get the crazy situation of a flying officer student nav calling his flying officer staff pilot "sir" while the sergeant FE who flew on the Varsity addressed his pilot as Fred (or whatever). We also had a flight lieutenant stude on my course who was expected to address the flying officer educator who took us for maths revision as "sir". On reflection it might have been better if we had all called each other "mate"!
Did someone say : “Double deductions”? Just had a nasty flashback.Urghh! Nav School in the early 70s was effectively training Lancaster navigators for an RAF equipping with F4s, Buccaneers and Nimrods. I hated it.
The whole thrust of this thread is that training styles have to evolve. 6 FTS was a bit late with that.
The whole thrust of this thread is that training styles have to evolve. 6 FTS was a bit late with that.
At basic flying trainng school I had a Flt. Sgt. pilot QFI (and he was brilliant), I was commissioned. At his suggestion first meeting of the day he would say "Good morning, Sir & I would reply good morning, Flight Sargent". The remainder of the day, on ground or in the air I called him "Sir" and he called me many things, including "mate", when I did fairly well !!
As long as the respect for knowledge and ability is recognised (both ways) I see little harm in two similar ranked people calling each other by any acceptable title (it is 2019). I guess that if a senior officer was involved (check ride, maybe) normal Service rules would apply. The students are there for one purpose, to learn the basics of air combat, and I know from several sources that it is working. I would love to give it a go again but the main objection would be the time factor, I would probably be about ninety on completion !!!!
Bill
As long as the respect for knowledge and ability is recognised (both ways) I see little harm in two similar ranked people calling each other by any acceptable title (it is 2019). I guess that if a senior officer was involved (check ride, maybe) normal Service rules would apply. The students are there for one purpose, to learn the basics of air combat, and I know from several sources that it is working. I would love to give it a go again but the main objection would be the time factor, I would probably be about ninety on completion !!!!
Bill
Back in the days when the RAF could afford a Refresher Training School, an Air Commodore (a bit of a tetchy old sod, it must be said) returned from a dual trip one Monday morning...
His QFI, in deference to rank, asked him if he would like a drink. Normal courtesy is that the student makes the brew, but the QFI had decided that diplomacy was necessary with this old sod. As he was brewing up The Man's tea, the QFI checked that the milk had been delivered, but it hadn't...and that which was in the fridge had definitely gone off.
"Would you like coffee mate?", asked the QFI.
"Young man, informality is one thing, but do NOT refer to me as your 'mate'", came the reply.
"Sorry, sir. The milk is off, sir, so would you like Coffeemate in your tea, sir, or would you prefer coffee, sir, perhaps with some Coffeemate, sir?"
"Tea will be fine"
Miserable old git.
His QFI, in deference to rank, asked him if he would like a drink. Normal courtesy is that the student makes the brew, but the QFI had decided that diplomacy was necessary with this old sod. As he was brewing up The Man's tea, the QFI checked that the milk had been delivered, but it hadn't...and that which was in the fridge had definitely gone off.
"Would you like coffee mate?", asked the QFI.
"Young man, informality is one thing, but do NOT refer to me as your 'mate'", came the reply.
"Sorry, sir. The milk is off, sir, so would you like Coffeemate in your tea, sir, or would you prefer coffee, sir, perhaps with some Coffeemate, sir?"
"Tea will be fine"
Miserable old git.
Last edited by BEagle; 24th Aug 2019 at 21:26.
Times change, but what goes around comes around. I recall an OASC briefing in the early 1970s when we were informed that the RAF was not attracting sufficient candidates who achieved a Board Grade 5. A suggestion from a non OASC attendee that maybe it would be worth examining the assessment criteria to ensure that they reflected societal change received short shrift. But of course we did change, and have gone on doing so. I recently read an interesting article in The New Statesman which it is well worth taking a few minutes to consider. I am not for one moment suggesting that the students who feature in the programme exhibit the characteristics described in the article, but it is the background from which they are drawn and they will be different from those of us who grew up in the period immediately following the Second World War. In fact I should be rather concerned if they were not different.
YS
YS
Nav School in the early 70s was effectively training Lancaster navigators for an RAF equipping with F4s, Buccaneers and Nimrods. I hated it.
Thread Starter
BEagle
When I was with 99 Sqn (1959 - 1963) we offered Nestea as well as Nescafe in our crew room (normally from jars left over from various route trips). Nescafe was fine, but hot Nestea was awful, so it never took the place of a proper brewed pot of tea.
Whatever happened to Nestea?
WT
"Sorry, sir. The milk is off, sir, so would you like Coffeemate in your tea, sir, or would you prefer coffee, sir, perhaps with some Coffeemate, sir?"
"Tea will be fine"
"Tea will be fine"
Whatever happened to Nestea?
WT
It rivalled Camp Coffee as a brew to avoid.
By the way, I still wonder when the RAF piping times of peace began and ended.
It would be nice to know, just for the record.
By the way, I still wonder when the RAF piping times of peace began and ended.
It would be nice to know, just for the record.