RAF Pilot Training Pipeline

[Sky Sports]

Are there still huge delays in the training pipeline - as highlighted by the BBC just over 2 years - or, are things getting better? For example, is it still a 2 year wait between IOT and EFT?

[downsizer]

Originally Posted by Sky Sports

Are there still huge delays in the training pipeline - as highlighted by the BBC just over 2 years - or, are things getting better? For example, is it still a 2 year wait between IOT and EFT?

Are you applying? Or have you applied?

[Lingo Dan]

I retired from the RAF in 1985, but I am still interested to read replies to the OP's question.

[Herod]

Three weeks short of two years from attestation to the squadron. But that was a LONG time ago. Just saying.

[Easy Street]

Originally Posted by downsizer

Are you applying? Or have you applied?

Last time the OP asked the same question, this was the story...

Its a genuine question for somebody who is about to join the pipeline. We were just curious how long his training might take compared to the lengths quoted in recent FOI's, BBC reports and NAO reports.

... and since that was last October you'd think they'd have the inside track by now

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Easy, I followed your link to the end of the thread and found that the OP - having not received an answer to his question, posed the same (polite) request on 31 December last year and still had no reply. I think he/she is being perfectly reasonable in asking the same question in an active thread. Neither you nor downsizer gave any helpful information.

I, too, have an interest in the answer - merely casual. I can't beat Herod's time (my attestation-to-first-Sqn took 2 years and 2 months), but at least I can claim to have been a Pilot Ossifer aircraft captain for the initial 4 months of my first tour.

[downsizer]

Originally Posted by Thud_and_Blunder

Easy, I followed your link to the end of the thread and found that the OP - having not received an answer to his question, posed the same (polite) request on 31 December last year and still had no reply. I think he/she is being perfectly reasonable in asking the same question in an active thread. Neither you nor downsizer gave any helpful information.

Context is key.

If they are in the pipeline, they will know roughly what the times are, hence why the question? Is the OP a journo trolling for info? Those that do know the info probably shouldn't be posting it on here either....

[beardy]

Those that do know the info probably shouldn't be posting it on here either...

WHAT? The performance of our government policy is confidential - really? I know, let's just throw our taxpayer's money at the military contractors and expect not to be told how well its spent. Perhaps the participant's silence would spare the contractor's embarrassment?

[downsizer]

Well like it or not, those serving are bound by rules on what they can say publicly and on social media (of which this is a type).....

I'm not saying that's right, but there are official channels for answering of questions like this....

And most, if not all of us, know the answer.

[beardy]

Well like it or not, those serving are bound by rules on what they can say publicly and on social media (of which this is a type).....

As you know there is a world of difference between military and commercial confidentiality. Disclosing information to the enemy is vastly different to disclosing information to the taxpayer. The former is against the public security and interest the latter is most definitely in the public interest even though it may cause embarrassment to the senior officers who instituted the changes that led to the current system. It is all too easy to hide behind 'rules.'

[muppetofthenorth]

Anecdotally, yes, it's still taking f@*#ing forever.

You can find multiple comments on Reddit, on TheStudentRoom, and other sites all attesting to the same fact; it's taking years to get going.

2 years to get from IOT to EFT is not uncommon, according to those sources.

[downsizer]

Originally Posted by beardy

As you know there is a world of difference between military and commercial confidentiality. Disclosing information to the enemy is vastly different to disclosing information to the taxpayer. The former is against the public security and interest the latter is most definitely in the public interest even though it may cause embarrassment to the senior officers who instituted the changes that led to the current system. It is all too easy to hide behind 'rules.'

Equally having been subject to a witch hunt about posts on here - that weren't disclosing information to the enemy - I'm acutely aware of what the policy on posting information is on the internet. But as you are probably out, you haven't read the DIN, and aren't subject to service discipline any longer.

[beardy]

Originally Posted by downsizer

Equally having been subject to a witch hunt about posts on here - that weren't disclosing information to the enemy - I'm acutely aware of what the policy on posting information is on the internet. But as you are probably out, you haven't read the DIN, and aren't subject to service discipline any longer.

True I haven't read the DIN.
It is outrageous that you as a public servant should be subjected to a witch hunt concerning posts that were immaterial to the Defence of the Realm.

[Wrathmonk]

Originally Posted by beardy

...the latter is most definitely in the public interest even though it may cause embarrassment to the senior officers who instituted the changes that led to the current system. It is all too easy to hide behind 'rules.'

And there is a laid down system for that called the Freedom of Information Act. Simples!

[Not_a_boffin]

Originally Posted by beardy

True I haven't read the DIN.
It is outrageous that you as a public servant should be subjected to a witch hunt concerning posts that were immaterial to the Defence of the Realm.

He does weigh the same as a duck.......

[Corporal Clott]

Sky Sports - the last lot to finish Modular Initial Officer Training (MIOT, the new IOT), will be starting ground school in the summer and EFT in early autumn. The 2 year holds have gone a long time ago. However, the Integrated Review’s announcement of the removal of Herc, Puma and Sentry is bound to create some turbulence in the pipeline again. But seeing as no one seems to know the exact dates of these platforms going out of service, or when the new ones replacing them start, then it is next to impossible to predict right now. That is what happens when you have defence reviews every 5 years and pipelines of similar lengths - by the time you turn the tap off for people coming in, and you wait to notice the change, it is probably too late to turn it back on again (or vice-versa!).

[Easy Street]

Originally Posted by Wrathmonk

And there is a laid down system for that called the Freedom of Information Act. Simples!

Indeed, and I'd observe that a FoI submitted when the OP last asked the question would have been answered a good couple of months ago. There is nothing stopping them doing so: FoIs are routinely received from members of public and get treated no differently than those from journalists or campaign groups. On topics where there has been no previous FoI traffic then there might be - arguably - a little room for judgement in such discussions on here, but on topics where the MOD secretariat has made a deliberate decision on what information to place in the public domain (informed by a range of legal, commercial, security, operational, and many other considerations) then asking people to provide additional information is effectively inviting them to breach regulations. In the case of these regulations, that could have knock-on effects for their security clearance and by extension their careers, with many areas of capability now protected by a requirement for DV clearance. You can argue that social media and public comms regulations are bollocks, or that I'm being pedantic thread police, or that it's objectionable to hide senior officials' mistakes behind rules, or that the snippets of information provided by Cpl Clott are innocuous non-operational stuff and can't hurt anyone. All of those things are probably true, but they are all beside the point, which is the effect on individuals should the 'system' decide to pursue them for having broken the rules. And if senior officials really are hiding their mistakes behind the rules in this case (which is highly debatable but let's assume it's true for the sake of this final point), how do you think they would react to those rules being broken? I'm no expert on cyber surveillance matters, but I post on here under the assumption that our friends in Cheltenham could readily identify me should an irritated senior official direct an investigation to be carried out.

[jayteeto]

I’ll save you the conspiracy theories. These are genuine questions from the dad of a very sharp lad trying to join up. He’s keen, motivated and knowledgeable. A GOOD candidate.
why wouldn’t a dad wonder what was going on?

[Sky Sports]

Is the OP a journo trolling for info?

No. Just asking an innocuous question on behalf of someone not on here, who will be asked indepth questions on the training pipeline in an interview in the coming weeks.
Yes, the question has been asked before, but, because the post(s) were hijacked and no satisfactory answer given, it's been asked again. Secondly, the interview has been cancelled a number of times, so we're after the up-to-date info.
Yes, we could have banged in an FOI request, but that would have wasted someones time in the MOD and it might not have come back in time.
Thank you, to all the people who have private messaged us with the same answer. Things are looking up it would seem. Bad luck to all those who are desperate for MFTS to fail!

There are 2 types of people on Pprune it would seem. Those willing to help the next generation and those who.....

[Sky Sports]

I’ll save you the conspiracy theories. These are genuine questions from the dad of a very sharp lad trying to join up. He’s keen, motivated and knowledgeable. A GOOD candidate.
why wouldn’t a dad wonder what was going on?

Thank you jayteeto