BA to RAF

[YOP]

Originally Posted by whiskydrinker

'Tarts' is in no way a reference to the others on the course, but is purely a correlation with a well known party theme 😁.

Hmmm!!
Having helped run a SERE course during a ground tour many years ago I'm not so sure!

[whiskydrinker]

Originally Posted by YOP

Hmmm!!
Having helped run a SERE course during a ground tour many years ago I'm not so sure!

Hence the '😁' 😉

[GICASI2]

Tin hat on - if, as it would seem from some posters, the old adage that ‘Officer first, pilot second’ is no longer relevant is it time to reintroduce SNCO pilots? I am sure we could identify those pilots who do not subscribe to being an Officer and invite them to remuster. Works in the Army...

[GICASI2]

Originally Posted by VinRouge

Respectfully, I fundamentally disagree with this. To get through a self funded ATPL shows a lot of resilience. Many of the guys have faced multiple redundancy, disrupted flying as a result, yet have gotten into the sim and consistently performed, often having not been at the controls for 12 months. For anyone who hasn't completed the BA assessment sim, it isn't a trivial affair.

People also need to consider that Low Level, para, SKE, NVG, NSO TALT, are just additional skillsets. They are no different to skills required for the civvie role, customer service, disruptive passenger handling or a CAT III equipment failure below alert height or flying with 3 minutes statistical contingency fuel. Same focus, same professionalism. You function and train to a set of standards and perform to them. There will of course be a number that struggle, it is a massive culture change. But to write people off for not having the required gumption or mettle as they are "civvies", from my experience is wholly wrong. Heathrow aircraft were landing in crosswinds and conditions during the winter storms well above anything seen during my military time, with an awareness from operations of the impact with mitigations (an extra 40 mins fuel without even asking for it on the plan, well thought out diversions) put in place before crew in. How often would you have seen that from an RAF Flight ops perspective?

There are a fair few ex single seat fast jet mates who have struggled in a multi crew environment, more systems management focused environment, unable to handle the banter. Does that apply to every single seat pilot? Absolutely not. We shouldn't be applying the same myopic view of civilians who can make a genuine contribution, with a fresh set of eyes to our operation and ask "why do you do it like that"? The people in the civilian market have a vast wealth of both personal life experience as well as a deep knowledge of human factors and the aviation world. Route knowledge and nuisances about a particular approach at some unheard of diversion that you dip in with an 80 year old granny dying of a TMI is second to none, as is operational decision making processes and formal structures for emergencies handling, none of which are formally taught but assumed as "airmanship" within the military. There is a lot of potential for this to be a symbiotic relationship and if given the go-ahead, should be seen as such.

Great points but you perhaps miss my point. Every newby first tourist RAF pilot has jumped through hoops that no amount of money or retries would see them through. All courses enroute to that coveted seat require a mettle that the self-improver has not demonstrated - pass or get chopped. Cadets are a different case, but even they only get trained to be part of a crew and fly instrument approaches (simplified I know) - the thinking bit comes much later; perhaps their CPL course is the equivalent of the METS in old parlance. However, every RAF pilot has been taught low level NAV, formation, advanced handling etc as part of the (old-speak) Group 1 Phase 1 course. If the civvies were to be brought into the service they should be made to complete all the courses and suffer the same chop rate that we all have had to contend with.

Yes they can do all that you say but so can every ‘heavies’ pilot. FJ has its own particular problems and socio/skill outliers. I too have seen many a FJ candidate, from all (nearly) the world’s Air forces fail to make the grade at initial training and a particularly vicious Command course. It happens. My main thrust is that if this is to go ahead, the Service should choose ex-military pilots whose backgrounds are known. I should have selected flippant mode off for my initial post.

[trim it out]

Originally Posted by GICASI2

is it time to reintroduce SNCO pilots?

[Herod]

is it time to reintroduce SNCO pilots

Quite possibly. I sometimes think I would have been happier that way. The best rank in the RAF had to be Master Pilot.

[Chugalug2]

Originally Posted by Herod

Quite possibly. I sometimes think I would have been happier that way. The best rank in the RAF had to be Master Pilot.

My best instructor was a Master Pilot, and I'm sure that he was the only reason that I finally got my wings. Polite, incredibly patient and encouraging, the only banter that I ever got from him as we went our different ways at the end of yet another day of trying that patience to its very limit was to say, "I'm off for a quick pint in the Mess before going home to the wife and a home cooked meal. You'll first have to tackle your secondary duties which will be far more onerous than your flying job". Rather than be downcast at this stark differential between the lives of Commissioned and Warrant Officers (in his case), I took immeasurable satisfaction in his quiet confidence that I would graduate as an RAF pilot. Still have the treasured cartoon of a fledgling being kicked out of the nest by its parent that bears his signature after my first solo.

[VinRouge]

Originally Posted by GICASI2

Tin hat on - if, as it would seem from some posters, the old adage that ‘Officer first, pilot second’ is no longer relevant is it time to reintroduce SNCO pilots? I am sure we could identify those pilots who do not subscribe to being an Officer and invite them to remuster. Works in the Army...

No, it’s not that we don’t subscribe to being an officer. It’s the suggestion that being an officer comes above all else. It doesn’t. My legal responsibility as an Aircraft Commander and not a senior officers lackey comes above all else.

[RetiredBA/BY]

. If the civvies were to be brought into the service they should be made to complete all the courses and suffer the same chop rate that we all have had to contend with.

.[/QUOTE]


My actual experience tells me that would be a waste of time, a very much abbreviated course, yes but a full course, absolutely not.

".......and my guess, is that the chop rate would very low, and because a civvie has not actually demonstrated the skills that you and I have had to acquire, do not assume they are not capable of obtaining them.

Many of the self funded, self improvers , by no means all, I have flown with, or instructed, have been very sharp, and totally committed, more than capable of passing RAF training. They chose a different life style.

.....as for low level nav. no problem, As a snotty nosed 18 year old kid. just out of school, I won the nav trophy at my FTS, 6, cant be that hard, and as for formation, again, no big deal, the skill can be taught and learnt.

[GICASI2]

Retired BA/BY

Yes, but you have completed and passed the courses. I am sure the OCU staff would be less than happy at having to spend time teaching the basics to someone who can (only) fly a perfect ILS.

If you believe the mantra ‘I decided to go the self improver route rather than join the Military because...’ then maybe your destiny should always have been as a Nigel. And it sounds as though you had some good instructors or were on a high chop rate course - last one standing gets the course wings 🤣

[GICASI2]

Originally Posted by VinRouge

No, it’s not that we don’t subscribe to being an officer. It’s the suggestion that being an officer comes above all else. It doesn’t. My legal responsibility as an Aircraft Commander and not a senior officers lackey comes above all else.

If you are an example of a junior Officer of recent years, I am glad to have left when I did. You really do not understand what your Commission conferred. You have your idea of duty completely inverted - you should have been an inspiration to those junior to you. Aircraft Commander - this term belongs firmly in BA-speak ‘to fly, to serve’. Laughable. You obviously live in a different world to the very many outstanding serving and ex-RAF officers I have had the pleasure of knowing, leading and flying with.

[Bob Viking]

Snooze fest

Is it just me or has this thread turned into dozens like it beforehand?

We seem to have lost the point of it, mainly because few people know anything and those that do won’t be speaking on the subject.

As for the infernal civvy vs military argument does anyone really think it can be resolved on here?!

BV

[GICASI2]

Originally Posted by Bob Viking

Is it just me or has this thread turned into dozens like it beforehand?
y
We seem to have lost the point of it, mainly because few people know anything and those that do won’t be speaking on the subject.

As for the infernal civvy vs military argument does anyone really think it can be resolved on here?!

BV

PPRUmourNEt - why spoil a good rumour with fact? Banter is what it’s all about!

[VinRouge]

Originally Posted by GICASI2

If you are an example of a junior Officer of recent years, I am glad to have left when I did. You really do not understand what your Commission conferred. You have your idea of duty completely inverted - you should have been an inspiration to those junior to you. Aircraft Commander - this term belongs firmly in BA-speak ‘to fly, to serve’. Laughable. You obviously live in a different world to the very many outstanding serving and ex-RAF officers I have had the pleasure of knowing, leading and flying with.

It seemed to work well over 16 years deployed multiple times flying and into Afghanistan, Iraq and Central Africa.

I really do understand what it conferred - but nothing is more important than the role as Aircraft Commander, which with it confers leadership and motivation, esprit de corps within that role and operating as a crew. I've met a few where the triangle was the other way around and it very often led to them coming a cropper. People identify far more as Crew working together as a unit from within a Squadron. I found regularly that loyalty outside structures of the Squadron was non-existent. To be honest, I don't have an issue with that.

[3 bladed beast]

Im very happy for people to join/rejoin the RAF. However, in my humble opinion, it cannot be at the expense of people in the training systems, on the ocu or front line. Those who have chosen a career and life in the RAF.

There are so many capable people who have left that would be most welcome back. I think manning have stated it won't be to the detriment of those who are currently serving.

We shall have to see on that promise.

[beamer]

From the perspective of a retired old fart - 16 yrs Mil/25 years civil - I have thoroughly enjoyed reading the thread with equal amounts of common sense and arrogant nonsense from contributors. Please keep it going and never let the truth get in the way of good old fashioned rumour and innuendo.

nb If I could go back to 1978 and rejoin I would do it like a shot - might do a bit better second time around !

Good Luck Chaps

[GICASI2]

Originally Posted by VinRouge

It seemed to work well over 16 years deployed multiple times flying and into Afghanistan, Iraq and Central Africa.

I really do understand what it conferred - but nothing is more important than the role as Aircraft Commander, which with it confers leadership and motivation, esprit de corps within that role and operating as a crew. I've met a few where the triangle was the other way around and it very often led to them coming a cropper. People identify far more as Crew working together as a unit from within a Squadron. I found regularly that loyalty outside structures of the Squadron was non-existent. To be honest, I don't have an issue with that.

And all that could be done admirably by a SNCO pilot. QED

[Juan Tugoh]

Originally Posted by GICASI2

And all that could be done admirably by a SNCO pilot. QED

QED? Hardly anything demonstrated. The powers that be disagree with your position so the argument is somewhat irrelevant. As it is, in the RAF, which is the service being talked about, all pilots are officers and that first. You don’t have to like or agree with it, but it is a fact and therefore must be addressed. Not to say that I disagree with you but my opinion on this is just as irrelevant as yours. The RAF are not about to take on SNCO pilots.

[Lima Juliet]

Taking the SNCO Pilot debate out of the weeds we need to think more “Why do we have SNCO/WO Pilots?”. For starters, most kids that want to be Pilots are graduates and do not want to be SNCOs. They want a Queen’s Commission and the kudos that attracts. Further, the cost of SNCO Pilots works out more expensive in the first part of their 20 year career too - don’t forget that Officer Aircrew and NCO Pilots get exactly the same RRP(F) between OR6 rank and OF3 ranks.

OR6 Supplement 4 Sgt starting salary = £39,114
OF1 Fg Off starting salary = £32,780

So the Sgt is paid nearly £7k more

After 2.5 years the Fg Off promotes to Flt Lt
OF2 Flt Lt starting salary = £42k (For 2 years)
OR 6 Supp 4 Level 2 = £40.2k
OR 6 Supp 4 Level 3 = £41.3

So the Flt Lt slowly claws back the £18k the Sgt is paid more than the Fg Off in the first 2.5 years over the next 10 years! By then the SNCO Pilot has promoted to FS/SSgt within 6 years (on average) so the repayment gap is still narrow.

OR7 Supp 4 starting salary = £44.5k
OF2 Flt Lt Level 5 = £47.3k

Top whack for a Flt Lt is £49.9k and for a OR-9 WO1/MAcr Pilot would be £53.2k.

So when you consider the RRP(F) is the same, they both get a £70k RP and they both have PAS/PES(A) available now at same place under AFPS15 (all ranks for EDP 20/40). Then you also take into account that SNCOs pay less for the same size of married quarters and get free uniform issue.

I want to ask, as a taxpayer, why we are paying for more expensive SNCO/WO Pilots when the job can be done by cheaper Commissioned Officers and we build a better cadre of staff officers for the senior ranks?

[Lima Juliet]

Originally Posted by 3 bladed beast

Im very happy for people to join/rejoin the RAF. However, in my humble opinion, it cannot be at the expense of people in the training systems, on the ocu or front line. Those who have chosen a career and life in the RAF.

There are so many capable people who have left that would be most welcome back. I think manning have stated it won't be to the detriment of those who are currently serving.

We shall have to see on that promise.

That is correct