New Flying Badges
Nope, that is hoop - they do the same ground-school followed by about 40 hours on a glass cockpit single engine, followed by a USAF Reaper Formal Training Unit, normally there is a live weapons event too, followed by a 54 Sqn OCU, then they get their wings, followed by LCR/CR - probably around 2 years since starting. They also get far more operational experience than others in their first tour - in fact, I can’t think of another platform that generates that exposure to ops so quickly. The mental strain is high, the physical strain can be bad too with odd shift patterns, and whilst you may not have your pink body on the line, there are a number of folks who would like to bump you off if they could find you. So it is different to the Lancaster Bomber crews of the 40s, but then again so is much of our live flying these days. 
ASTRA is the campaign to build our Next Generation Royal Air Force. The fourth Industrial Revolution, a rapidly changing geostrategic context, the new domains of Cyber and Space, and the demands of a new generation of people mean that the status quo is not an option. We must adapt at pace, in depth and across our Service. We need to be ready and able to act faster, for longer and with greater precision and weight in more places around the world simultaneously than today. We require substantial changes to our way in warfare, how we command and how we are structured if we are to protect, engage, constrain and fight successfully.
The 2020 RAF Strategy has five objectives:
Meet our Operational Requirements.
Build a Workforce Fit for the Future.
Design and Deliver the Next Generation Air Force.
Operate Safely, Deliver our Output Efficiently, Act Professionally.
Support Global Britain.
ASTRA will define how we deliver decisive air and space power effect in the highly contested environments of the future. ASTRA will establish a blueprint for that future – nominally the RAF of 2035. It will embrace networks and data, mobilise space and cyber, modernise our bases, transform our way in warfare, and supercharge our interoperability with other warfighting domains, Services and allies. The core themes of ASTRA are people, training, infrastructure & support, and equipment, underpinned by a conceptual element.
I’ll give you an idea of some of the things within the ASTRA core themes (some with links):
Conceptual
Form the ‘Trenchard Group’. https://www.raf-ff.org.uk/news/the-r...xt-generation/
Get after the Space domain. https://www.defensenews.com/global/e...space-command/
Develop ‘Theory of Command’.
Personnel
The rationalisation of the sub-branches and specialisations, plus badges and uniform. (this is what this thread is about!!)
By 2025-30 expect to have 10x “Employment Fields” vice the 30+ Branches and Trades.
Expect to see more portfolio careers – leavers to commercial sector, re-joiners and lateral entrants.
Exploit ‘Coders’, ‘Information Advantage’ and Space to the RAF’s advantage.
Equipment
Poseidon/Wedgetail entry into service. https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles...adar-aircraft/
Protector entry into service, plus potentially expanding role outside of persistent armed-ISR overland. https://www.nationaldefensemagazine....rotector-drone
Reduce the number of ISR types, with the long term goal that ‘every platform has a sensor’.
Directed Energy Weapons. https://www.defensenews.com/global/e...ones-missiles/
Swarming Drones and Loyal Wingmen development. https://www.aerosociety.com/news/raf...dron-in-april/
Tempest development and entry into service. https://www.raf.mod.uk/what-we-do/team-tempest/
Training
Increase the synthetic to live flying mix – some platforms can only do what they do for real on Ops or in the synthetic environment.
SOCRATES/MERCURY – reduction of overtraining. More modular so that common elements between Basic Recruit Training, SNCO training and Initial Officer Training can reduce the time to train on promotion.
Accreditation of training – both ways, into and out of the Service.
Support & Infra
Programme HYDRO seeks to finally get after the issue of poor heating/hot water on our estate. Info here: https://www.raf-ff.org.uk/news/progr...he-air-estate/
WiFi is already being rolled out that can be used for business purposes in public work space areas (including HQ Air).
Reduce the ~50 airfields to around half that number, but make sure they are properly resourced, in the best possible condition and able to support carbon-neutral energy objectives.
Eradication of Grade 3 and 4 accommodation.
These are but a few. The key word here is “Campaign” in that it is a long-haul programme of improvements and changes over 15 years designed to get the RAF fit for 2035. As ever, there will be dissenters, but many of us, even the old and bold, know that we have to get firmly behind this to make it a success. Expecting a kid to accept an RAF that is more at home with “Get Some In” than it is to today’s world just isn’t going to work.
When the RAF formed in 1918, it was something that many had no idea would ever thrive as it does today. Trenchard had the vision to get us through the first 100 years, and it is now time for a new vision towards the next 100 years. Campaign ASTRA takes us on that journey. Exciting times if you can cope with change!
For those that like “Get Some In” then you can reminisce here:
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for Cabin Crew, yes they have changed too. No longer employed as a Mess Steward, they are all contractors in Messes these days, they are employed primarily as Cabin Crew now and have become an essential part of the Voyager and 146 capabilities. The WSOp (ME) ALM still act as the senior supervisor off of the flight deck, as a Chief Purser on the Voyager, working with the rest of the crew - Pilots and Cabin Crew. Then some of the WSO/WSOp (ME) also conduct the Mission Systems Operator (MSO) on the Voyager too - running the fuel plan on AAR and the kit on the Voyager, again splitting the legacy tasks of the Nav and Air Eng with the Co-Pilot.
All WSOp (NCA) are qualified in both MSO and Purser roles on the Voyager, the MSO role takes primacy and the vast majority of their time is spent as an MSO on AAR tasks than as a Purser conducting AT.
Nope, that is hoop - they do the same ground-school followed by about 40 hours on a glass cockpit single engine, followed by a USAF Reaper Formal Training Unit, normally there is a live weapons event too, followed by a 54 Sqn OCU, then they get their wings, followed by LCR/CR - probably around 2 years since starting. They also get far more operational experience than others in their first tour - in fact, I can’t think of another platform that generates that exposure to ops so quickly. The mental strain is high, the physical strain can be bad too with odd shift patterns, and whilst you may not have your pink body on the line, there are a number of folks who would like to bump you off if they could find you. So it is different to the Lancaster Bomber crews of the 40s, but then again so is much of our live flying these days.
I get it. It's fun to laugh at the oldies and be all modern and embrace this new data-linked world. But let us still call a spade a spade.
Sorry to hear about your colleague ACW,he did extremely well to progress to pilot .
Thanks Doorslider. I was led to believe that Air and Ground Stewards conduct Voyager as a first tour, then some may go to 32 Sqn for BAe 146 for a second flying tour, or to MCSU for a ground tour. They can volunteer to go back to flying duties, or stay on the ground in other catering management roles, after their ground tour, depending on where their career is taking them?
I also thought that WSOp (ME) ALMs train as Pursers first and then later into the MSO role. I understood that the MSO was an upgrade later? That was explained to me very recently at BZN, my apologies if that was misunderstood. I’ll need to go ask again.
I also thought that WSOp (ME) ALMs train as Pursers first and then later into the MSO role. I understood that the MSO was an upgrade later? That was explained to me very recently at BZN, my apologies if that was misunderstood. I’ll need to go ask again.
Always the sign of a weak argument, going for the person rather than the point he is making. The point is, Lima Juliet, that the RAF is awarding Flying Badges to personnel that operate from the ground while denying them to aircrew who carry out their duties while airborne as part of a constituted crew, ie aircrew! That may make sense to you in your Brave New World but it doesn't make sense to me or others here.
I remember training on 3 different types to get my wings and was too busy with a career on SH to think about crossovers to other fleets. Thanks for the offer though.
VH
Let’s not forget though, as a rotary pilot, only your EFT was completed on a proper aircraft before you went off to fly those strange whirly contraptions.
Maybe your badge should have had extra wings to reflect the heretical nature of your chosen platform.
I make the point light heartedly but surely a pilot is a pilot? There would be uproar if we wasted money and training hours on pilots that don’t need them. We don’t send rotary and multi guys to fly the T6 or Hawk (likewise we don’t teach FJ students to fly helos) so why bother sending Reaper guys? Why waste time doing things that don’t need to be done?
As I said previously, if a Reaper guy were to crossover that would be the time do the extra bits. If they then failed that course they would be chopped like anyone else and could return to Reaper.
A multi crossover guy who gets chopped at Valley doesn’t cease to be a pilot so why would a Reaper guy?
I realise some people will never come round to the modern way of thinking which is their prerogative but if those of us serving can cope maybe just let it slide. It won’t affect your life one iota.
Final thought. If you were to chat to a person with wings on their uniform what would be the first question you might ask? Probably what do they fly. How you judge them after that is up to you. But they are still an RAF pilot regardless.
BV
Maybe your badge should have had extra wings to reflect the heretical nature of your chosen platform.
I make the point light heartedly but surely a pilot is a pilot? There would be uproar if we wasted money and training hours on pilots that don’t need them. We don’t send rotary and multi guys to fly the T6 or Hawk (likewise we don’t teach FJ students to fly helos) so why bother sending Reaper guys? Why waste time doing things that don’t need to be done?
As I said previously, if a Reaper guy were to crossover that would be the time do the extra bits. If they then failed that course they would be chopped like anyone else and could return to Reaper.
A multi crossover guy who gets chopped at Valley doesn’t cease to be a pilot so why would a Reaper guy?
I realise some people will never come round to the modern way of thinking which is their prerogative but if those of us serving can cope maybe just let it slide. It won’t affect your life one iota.
Final thought. If you were to chat to a person with wings on their uniform what would be the first question you might ask? Probably what do they fly. How you judge them after that is up to you. But they are still an RAF pilot regardless.
BV
The RAF cannot afford the cost of aerodromes, aircraft, QFIs or flying time of the old days - such as when every pilot did the same Jet Provost course to Wings level. Then they were streamed Gnat, Varsity or Whirlwind.
Which is a pity.
But I suppose that's it.
Which is a pity.
But I suppose that's it.
Gentleman Aviator
Have to agree with you BV. I always - well from a very early stage of training - wanted to go rotary, but had to prove myself in a JP upside down at FL ridiculous and warp factor snot at low level (the latter was great fun).
The argument being that "You are a pilot and could fly anything."
Strangely the posting to the Reds never came through.....
.... of those that did cross over, many came back. Some found that promotion came - predicated on their rotary performance - with insufficient FJ time to be credible in an exec post. [Mogwi did pretty well though!!]
And I wouldn't have swapped.......
But agree with BEags that the wider experience made one a more rounded operator - and not just physically!
The argument being that "You are a pilot and could fly anything."
Strangely the posting to the Reds never came through.....
.... of those that did cross over, many came back. Some found that promotion came - predicated on their rotary performance - with insufficient FJ time to be credible in an exec post. [Mogwi did pretty well though!!]
And I wouldn't have swapped.......
But agree with BEags that the wider experience made one a more rounded operator - and not just physically!
Fast Jet, Multi, Helicopter; they all have one thing in common, they fly! UAVs fly also, but their crews do not. The crews of Fast Jet, Multis, Helicopters do fly, and therefore they are aircrew, including their cabin crew (though not many in FJ I'll allow). By classing RPAS crews as aircrew and denying that classification to those who do fly in constituted flying crews is illogical, cruel, and I suspect based on snobbishness.
It has been said rightly that the origins of RAF aircrew began with such snobbishness but in the end the RAF had to bite the bullet. Time for it to do so again. Why? Because the purpose of Cabin Crew is to safeguard the lives of their passengers, be it in the air or on the ground. Without being eligible for a Flying Badge they are seen by some as mere airborne waiters and waitresses (their secondary role) and so the authority they need to ensure compliance to their instructions in emergency situations is much diminished. Be they SACs or Cpls, they must be in charge when evacuation, donning oxygen masks, donning LJs, remaining strapped in, or simply attending to their safety briefs is called for.
The Military Air Regulator, the MAA, says they are aircrew but the Military Air Operator, the RAF, says they are not. Yet another indicator of the ambivalent attitude prevalent in the modern RAF to Air Safety!
It has been said rightly that the origins of RAF aircrew began with such snobbishness but in the end the RAF had to bite the bullet. Time for it to do so again. Why? Because the purpose of Cabin Crew is to safeguard the lives of their passengers, be it in the air or on the ground. Without being eligible for a Flying Badge they are seen by some as mere airborne waiters and waitresses (their secondary role) and so the authority they need to ensure compliance to their instructions in emergency situations is much diminished. Be they SACs or Cpls, they must be in charge when evacuation, donning oxygen masks, donning LJs, remaining strapped in, or simply attending to their safety briefs is called for.
The Military Air Regulator, the MAA, says they are aircrew but the Military Air Operator, the RAF, says they are not. Yet another indicator of the ambivalent attitude prevalent in the modern RAF to Air Safety!
Chug, calm down dear... they have a badge right now that they wear:
Who knows, maybe in the future, they will transition to the new Airborne Specialist badge too. Let’s wait and see, shall we...
Who knows, maybe in the future, they will transition to the new Airborne Specialist badge too. Let’s wait and see, shall we...
C
I'll calm down when all RAF Aircrew are recognised as such LJ. So let's not wait for another fatal accident thread in this forum, this time stemming from certain passengers challenging their Cabin Crew instructions when seconds count, because they are 'just waiters'. MAA regulations require Cabin Crew in various numbers to be present on certain RAF aircraft dependent on the pax numbers, such Cabin Crew to be Aircrew. So are they Aircrew or not?
The badge you illustrate is issued to certain members of an RAF Ground Trade. What Blazing Saddles might have referred to as a 'Stinkin Badge'. You know full well that I am asking for a Flying Badge for them, as issued to all RAF Aircrew. They are RAF Aircrew (check with your Air Regulator). So give them the Flying Badge that is their right!
The badge you illustrate is issued to certain members of an RAF Ground Trade. What Blazing Saddles might have referred to as a 'Stinkin Badge'. You know full well that I am asking for a Flying Badge for them, as issued to all RAF Aircrew. They are RAF Aircrew (check with your Air Regulator). So give them the Flying Badge that is their right!
I think you're perhaps over estimating the power of the badge Chugalug.
I doubt pax would not listen to cabin crew because they don't have a badge. It's quite obvious they are in a position of authority on a military flight because they're the ones in flying suits running the show up and down the aisles.
I doubt pax would not listen to cabin crew because they don't have a badge. It's quite obvious they are in a position of authority on a military flight because they're the ones in flying suits running the show up and down the aisles.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
errrr, haven't you just written a more detailed version of what I said?: 40 hours in a SEP followed by sim trg? So, FTU syllabus and CR tick boxes aside, I am right.
I get it. It's fun to laugh at the oldies and be all modern and embrace this new data-linked world. But let us still call a spade a spade.
I get it. It's fun to laugh at the oldies and be all modern and embrace this new data-linked world. But let us still call a spade a spade.
40 hrs EFT
100 hrs OCU (probable live weapon drop)
50 hrs NCR to LCR (100% operational flying)
150 - 250 hrs LCR to CR Advanced (100% operational flying).
At this point a pilot is deemed fully qualified
These hours are an average and don't take into account previous types or experience.
Oh and its worth noting there are no circuits, no take-offs, landings or Instrument Flying required so pretty much all hours are about fighting the aircraft. How much of conventional OCUs and flying training is covering those basics?
That is another 5 months of training to cover that off...
Last edited by heights good; 25th Apr 2020 at 20:04.