No more ACs, LACs, and SACs....
Join Date: May 2022
Location: Belfast
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’m flying this week on RAF aircraft. Is it just former RAF personnel who seem to have issues with absolutely everything the RAF does? Beards, ranks, D&I, number of acft on flypasts. The irony being, the RAF has never been so operational since the Cold War days. Yes, shock horror, with beards and braids and …. the horror….
No issues with Beards, ponytails or Tattoo's etc at all. They made up SAC(T) when J/T already existed. Air Specialist (Class 2), to replace LAC. TBH its very Americanised IMHO, I'm sure someone got a promotion or an OBE/MBE for that pile of rubbish that has been written and due implementation on 01 Jul 22.
Last edited by Senior Pilot; 6th Jun 2022 at 20:04. Reason: Fix quote
Kudos to you, Roly old mate, for continuing to endure all this wiggy woke nonsense! I hope that you're still able to take to the WBY and 'turn your bum to the sun' regularly to escape such bolleaux?
Back when the Specialist Aircrew scheme was first under consideration, people were consulted about whether they should have distinguishing rank insignia etc. When responses such as secret handshakes were suggested, the idea was dropped. Happy faces at the prospect of increased flying pay and no promotion exams, plus many years of flying tours were sufficient indication of status!
Back when the Specialist Aircrew scheme was first under consideration, people were consulted about whether they should have distinguishing rank insignia etc. When responses such as secret handshakes were suggested, the idea was dropped. Happy faces at the prospect of increased flying pay and no promotion exams, plus many years of flying tours were sufficient indication of status!
I have read the IBN, it really is eroding the rank structure (IMHO). I get that they are trying to make it gender neutral, but that is a farce. And to top it all off there was a survey carried out back in Dec 21, so its from within the ranks who wanted it changed, personally I reckon its just given the Top Brass the ammo to do what they have been after for a while to appease a small minority. They could have done this in a much better way.
No Toadstool, it's not just the "ex-"; or the "old"!
Last edited by Jobza Guddun; 6th Jun 2022 at 22:11.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Disrespectful
They talk about ethos, this is all getting beyond a joke. When will some senior leadership stand up and stop this nonsense. The priorities appear to be all this woke stuff, I personally don’t care what orientation anyone is as long as they can do the job. They join an organisation with tradition and history ( I know not much compared to the RN and Army). Have we forgotten we are a fighting force, that needs to be properly resourced. I’d much prefer funds wasted on this nonsense to be spent where it makes a positive contribution to capability not one persons crusade to leave their legacy behind. A legacy which has caused more harm than good. Hopefully the next leader will have the courage to return the service to the one we knew, the one that many AC’s, LAC’s and SAC’s made the ultimate sacrifice in service of. I hope personnel are able to be frank during any visits and respectfully expressing their true feelings on this step too far. Maybe then someone may realise the true feelings out there, unless they are totally self serving and are using these changes to promote any future employment.
They talk about ethos, this is all getting beyond a joke. When will some senior leadership stand up and stop this nonsense. The priorities appear to be all this woke stuff, I personally don’t care what orientation anyone is as long as they can do the job. They join an organisation with tradition and history ( I know not much compared to the RN and Army). Have we forgotten we are a fighting force, that needs to be properly resourced. I’d much prefer funds wasted on this nonsense to be spent where it makes a positive contribution to capability not one persons crusade to leave their legacy behind. A legacy which has caused more harm than good. Hopefully the next leader will have the courage to return the service to the one we knew, the one that many AC’s, LAC’s and SAC’s made the ultimate sacrifice in service of. I hope personnel are able to be frank during any visits and respectfully expressing their true feelings on this step too far. Maybe then someone may realise the true feelings out there, unless they are totally self serving and are using these changes to promote any future employment.
FB
Join Date: Jun 2022
Location: Uk
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air Vehicle = The Aircraft (yes they could just use this instead of AV - I agree)
Air System = everything that goes with the AV to support it so the Air System = the AV + Spares, Ground Equipment, Tooling, Training(pilot and engineers), Simulators, manufacturer support for modifications/maintenance scheduling changes etc
we dont just buy an aircraft but an entire air system.
So an F1 analogy:
Air Vehicle = F1 Race Vehicle = the F1 Car
Air System = F1 Racing System = the F1 Car + Pit Crew, spares, pit crew equipment, tooling, training (pit crew and engineers), race Simulator, mods support from manufacturer, transport system to get to races round the world etc.
Its also a useful thing for ministers when asked "why does it cost us £x Bn for only x number of jets" they can say "Well actually we are buying an Air System and that price includes not only the Air Vehicles (aircraft in english) but also the support package for them including spares, all tooling, training and future support for modifications and improvements during the lifetime of the fleet in service blah blah blah etc etc"
Last edited by Moglington; 7th Jun 2022 at 13:50.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,837
Received 2,805 Likes
on
1,195 Posts
What gets me is they spent all that money to replace the JT only a scant few years ago, to now spend another load of money to change it all again, and for what, to pander to a minority, monies that would be better spent on patching up some of the failing infrastructure.
Here is a thought.
two stripes is a corporal
three stripes are a Sergeant
So simply make it AC, LAC and SAC as the rank without is being shorthand for anything, meaning SAC is an SAC and the term Senior Air Craftsman wording no longer exists, hence no sex discrimination problems.
Does that make sense, after all if you asked someone his rank they would normally simply say SAC, not Senior Air Craftsman.
Here is a thought.
two stripes is a corporal
three stripes are a Sergeant
So simply make it AC, LAC and SAC as the rank without is being shorthand for anything, meaning SAC is an SAC and the term Senior Air Craftsman wording no longer exists, hence no sex discrimination problems.
Does that make sense, after all if you asked someone his rank they would normally simply say SAC, not Senior Air Craftsman.
Air Vehicle and Air System are useful words to describe 2 different things:
Air Vehicle = The Aircraft (yes they could just use this instead of AV - I agree)
Air System = everything that goes with the AV to support it so the Air System = the AV + Spares, Ground Equipment, Tooling, Training(pilot and engineers), Simulators, manufacturer support for modifications/maintenance scheduling changes etc
we dont just buy an aircraft but an entire air system.
So an F1 analogy:
Air Vehicle = the F1 Car
Air System = the F1 Car + Pit Crew, spares, pit crew equipment, tooling, training (pit crew and engineers), race Simulator, mods support from manufacturer, transport system to get to races round the world etc.
Its also a useful thing for ministers when asked "why does it cost us £x Bn for only x number of jets" they can say "Well actually we are buying an Air System and that price includes not only the Air Vehicles (aircraft in english) but also the support package for them including spares, all tooling, training and future support for modifications and improvements during the lifetime of the fleet in service blah blah blah etc etc"
Air Vehicle = The Aircraft (yes they could just use this instead of AV - I agree)
Air System = everything that goes with the AV to support it so the Air System = the AV + Spares, Ground Equipment, Tooling, Training(pilot and engineers), Simulators, manufacturer support for modifications/maintenance scheduling changes etc
we dont just buy an aircraft but an entire air system.
So an F1 analogy:
Air Vehicle = the F1 Car
Air System = the F1 Car + Pit Crew, spares, pit crew equipment, tooling, training (pit crew and engineers), race Simulator, mods support from manufacturer, transport system to get to races round the world etc.
Its also a useful thing for ministers when asked "why does it cost us £x Bn for only x number of jets" they can say "Well actually we are buying an Air System and that price includes not only the Air Vehicles (aircraft in english) but also the support package for them including spares, all tooling, training and future support for modifications and improvements during the lifetime of the fleet in service blah blah blah etc etc"
Join Date: Jun 2022
Location: Uk
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air Vehicle and Air System are useful words to describe 2 different things:
Air Vehicle = The Aircraft (yes they could just use this instead of AV - I agree)
Air System = everything that goes with the AV to support it so the Air System = the AV + Spares, Ground Equipment, Tooling, Training(pilot and engineers), Simulators, manufacturer support for modifications/maintenance scheduling changes etc
we dont just buy an aircraft but an entire air system.
So an F1 analogy:
Air Vehicle = F1 Race Vehicle = the F1 Car
Air System = F1 Racing System = the F1 Car + Pit Crew, spares, pit crew equipment, tooling, training (pit crew and engineers), race Simulator, mods support from manufacturer, transport system to get to races round the world etc.
Its also a useful thing for ministers when asked "why does it cost us £x Bn for only x number of jets" they can say "Well actually we are buying an Air System and that price includes not only the Air Vehicles (aircraft in english) but also the support package for them including spares, all tooling, training and future support for modifications and improvements during the lifetime of the fleet in service blah blah blah etc etc"
Air Vehicle = The Aircraft (yes they could just use this instead of AV - I agree)
Air System = everything that goes with the AV to support it so the Air System = the AV + Spares, Ground Equipment, Tooling, Training(pilot and engineers), Simulators, manufacturer support for modifications/maintenance scheduling changes etc
we dont just buy an aircraft but an entire air system.
So an F1 analogy:
Air Vehicle = F1 Race Vehicle = the F1 Car
Air System = F1 Racing System = the F1 Car + Pit Crew, spares, pit crew equipment, tooling, training (pit crew and engineers), race Simulator, mods support from manufacturer, transport system to get to races round the world etc.
Its also a useful thing for ministers when asked "why does it cost us £x Bn for only x number of jets" they can say "Well actually we are buying an Air System and that price includes not only the Air Vehicles (aircraft in english) but also the support package for them including spares, all tooling, training and future support for modifications and improvements during the lifetime of the fleet in service blah blah blah etc etc"
Without ALL the infrastructure every AV would cease to function. Obvious examples are the RAF Regiment [force protection] and Central Band [public image] and the Reds. Perhaps the Air System described in the quote should be the Air Sub-System?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2022
Location: Uk
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moglington - nope, they are wanque words and you even said it “aircraft in English”! 
Sometimes the air vehicle is useless on its own, particularly when it doesn’t have a cockpit. Reaper would be useless if we didn’t buy the ground control stations to actually operate it. You don’t buy a child a toy remote control aircraft without the remote control.
Even for those with a cockpit the ground systems are just as essential. We don’t just buy x number of F35 aircraft, we actually buy the F35 air system. So we have the bespoke mission planning software for pilots to plan missions for loading into the jet. We buy the bespoke maintenance software so engineers can record and schedule maintenance. We buy the diagnostic software so they can plug into the jet to run tests and read error codes. We buy the specialist tooling so the engineers can maintain the stealthy skin of the jet. And that’s just the front end squadron stuff. We are also buying into the manufacturer monitoring the trending of parts across the entire fleet and developing mods and improvements to faults discovered as the aircraft rack up the flying hours.
That is the difference between buying an air vehicle (or aircraft if you prefer) and an air system.
Last edited by Moglington; 8th Jun 2022 at 01:34.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,837
Received 2,805 Likes
on
1,195 Posts
Just keep the acronym as thee rank and ditch the meaning. Simples.
As always, it's refreshing to note that those still serving just get on with it as usual, whilst the retired keyboard Cold-Warriors bleat on about "wokeism" etc on the internet. If you're that offended by something that doesn't apply to you, may I suggest you contact the Daily Mail - they'd love to hear from you...
As always, it's refreshing to note that those still serving just get on with it as usual, whilst the retired keyboard Cold-Warriors bleat on about "wokeism" etc on the internet. If you're that offended by something that doesn't apply to you, may I suggest you contact the Daily Mail - they'd love to hear from you...