UKMFTS Failing to Deliver...again
The piece I listened to, clearly stated "we" would be training their fighter pilots. Either the journalist got it wrong or there's capacity in our training system.......in which case everything is now tickety boo. Wigston needn't have troubled the Italians!
Why is everyone getting excited, everything is now VIRTUAL so you only have to train to react to a virtual threat. As for our 'ex pat' pilots training the Chinese to be able to cope with 'western' tactics we will simply order our guys to adopt their tactics and then reactivate 11 group and Bently Priory and use super coded messages like Angels One Five and Buster or pancake. Its only a huge joke, it has to be, no one with a grain of a brain could possibly think that anyone actually believes this is real. Even the aircraft shortage is no problem, at a secret location in a clotted cream mine somewhere in the west country are dozens of Kirby Cadet MK 111 gliders being prepared to boost the training system. These are so high tech they do not use propellers thereby removing a major failure potential. whilst also teaching all he basic skills required for flight and reducing the costs of overshoots (you cant). There we are all sorted and then we can get on with all the important stuff like replacing the carpets at MOD or deciding who pays for the biscuits at the meetings. Actually I have found it very difficult to send biscuits via the usb port at teams meetings, so there's a challenge.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
In case it wasn't clear yet, Chief of the Air Staff again clarifies that the UK Military Flying Training System is delivering what it is contracted to deliver. The problems currently are in the Advanced Phase (and OCUs), and it is the MOD/RAF that is responsible there.
Ascent delivers Advanced Jet Training with HAWK T2 at Valley, but since HAWK was picked ahead of everything else and imposed upon the contractor, it is the MOD that must ensure HAWK is available for N thousand flying hours a year. Right now, due to the engine issue, it just isn't.
This is why some UK pilots are going to get Advanced phase training abroad. A deal in this sense has just been reached with Italy to send 2 pairs, beginning in July, to Decimomannu to train at the new International School. A recovery plan is on the way for the Hawk engines.
It is also, very probably, the reason why the announced UK role in training Ukrainian pilots is focused specifically on Elementary and Basic training phases. UKMFTS has slots and can take them in, while the Advanced Phase literally could not, at the moment...
Ascent delivers Advanced Jet Training with HAWK T2 at Valley, but since HAWK was picked ahead of everything else and imposed upon the contractor, it is the MOD that must ensure HAWK is available for N thousand flying hours a year. Right now, due to the engine issue, it just isn't.
This is why some UK pilots are going to get Advanced phase training abroad. A deal in this sense has just been reached with Italy to send 2 pairs, beginning in July, to Decimomannu to train at the new International School. A recovery plan is on the way for the Hawk engines.
It is also, very probably, the reason why the announced UK role in training Ukrainian pilots is focused specifically on Elementary and Basic training phases. UKMFTS has slots and can take them in, while the Advanced Phase literally could not, at the moment...
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
According to CAS, planning is in place for up to around 27 british pilots to undergo Advanced jet training abroad. Not all slots might actually be used if HAWK recover profile holds. Current issue greatly reduces life in flying hours of Adour engines, cutting down availability.
Adour front "half" by Safran, rear is Rolls Royce. Work ongoing to return fleet to 50% availability by end of this year. 14 engines and 11 aircraft available now; will be 18 by september, flatlining there for 2024 when Safran delivers fixed front. Back to normal for early 2025...
Adour front "half" by Safran, rear is Rolls Royce. Work ongoing to return fleet to 50% availability by end of this year. 14 engines and 11 aircraft available now; will be 18 by september, flatlining there for 2024 when Safran delivers fixed front. Back to normal for early 2025...
The following 2 users liked this post by Martin the Martian:
Interestingly, during the Defence Select Committee meeting earlier in the week, Ellwood suggested that the way to fix UK pilot training is to take Hawk availability and the Advanced Fast Jet Training pipeline out of the hands of the MoD and to include it in the UKMFTS contract with Ascent, and Knighton said this was being considered. Seems to run counter to the thread of opinions as to where the fault lies, as voiced earlier in this discussion.
I'm sure that won't be a cheap and easy option......
I was pleased to see that ACM Knighton made the point to the Defence Committee, in the subtlest and politest possible way, that the RAF had ended up with the Hawk T2 at ministerial behest. The point definitely landed because (Conservative) Tobias Ellwood jokingly exclaimed in response "ah, I knew it would be Labour's fault!". But it is something to bear in mind about industrial strategies: they don't always deliver the best kit. Obviously there are good reasons to pursue them, but the consequences have to be acknowledged when they occur if we're to be clear sighted about similar decisions in future. [Off topic, but likewise I thought the ACM trod the line very well in making the point that E-7 numbers were a ministerial decision based on budgetary priorities across the three services, and not the RAF's recommendation].
The following users liked this post:
Interestingly, during the Defence Select Committee meeting earlier in the week, Ellwood suggested that the way to fix UK pilot training is to take Hawk availability and the Advanced Fast Jet Training pipeline out of the hands of the MoD and to include it in the UKMFTS contract with Ascent, and Knighton said this was being considered. Seems to run counter to the thread of opinions as to where the fault lies, as voiced earlier in this discussion.
The following users liked this post:
The system at Shawbury, and from what I could see at Valley, wasn't broken and handing over control of everything to Ascent to run (with the exception of the ownership of the aircraft) was just opening the door to contractual abuse.
Only the VSOs seemed to think it was a good idea and didn't question the contract award to the lowest bidder - directorships all round on retirement perhaps?........
Only the VSOs seemed to think it was a good idea and didn't question the contract award to the lowest bidder - directorships all round on retirement perhaps?........
The following users liked this post:
Nail on head, especially given the timescale of the MFTS programme initiation.
In the recent past (1996) the Chief of Defence Procurement had expressly forbidden the letting of any contact with a GFX (Government Furnished Information/Equipment/Facilities) clause.
The primary risk on any aircraft programme was that it was no longer MoD policy to maintain airworthiness. Yet item 1 on most contracted GFX Annexes would be 'Quantity x airworthy....'. (#2 is access to UK strategic assets, that only MoD owns. #3 is access to a simulator at the In Use Build Standard, which hasn't been MoD policy since around 1987. And so forth). MoD couldn't, and still can't, demonstrate Hawk was airworthy. While it is permitted (despite the law) to ignore this when telling aircrew to fly the aircraft, it is a blank cheque to the company under contract. CDP was advised of this many times. And was pressed on this very point in March 1999 by the Defence Committee. And admitted it. (So think about what was too embarrassing not to admit).
This edict would have placed MoD in default on ANY aircraft/equipment programme, and was seen as a sneaky way to chop the defence budget. Not by coincidence, at the same time he announced 600 redundancies among technical project managers. And why not? They'd have nothing to do. But at the same time, the same staff were told they must still meet time, cost and performance.
What to do? Ignore CDP or... ignore CDP. Some chose wisely and delivered to TC&P. Others chose... wisely?... and advanced, their only 'achievement' being to follow orders and cancel programmes, or withdraw support leaving the project office to do their work. This especially applied to Service HQs, whose job it is to manage GFX. All the project office does is insert the GFX annex in the contract, and provide a degree of support.
The current situation on UKMFTS can be no surprise, as it will have been #1 risk since inception. The only question was how much would be wasted.
In the recent past (1996) the Chief of Defence Procurement had expressly forbidden the letting of any contact with a GFX (Government Furnished Information/Equipment/Facilities) clause.
The primary risk on any aircraft programme was that it was no longer MoD policy to maintain airworthiness. Yet item 1 on most contracted GFX Annexes would be 'Quantity x airworthy....'. (#2 is access to UK strategic assets, that only MoD owns. #3 is access to a simulator at the In Use Build Standard, which hasn't been MoD policy since around 1987. And so forth). MoD couldn't, and still can't, demonstrate Hawk was airworthy. While it is permitted (despite the law) to ignore this when telling aircrew to fly the aircraft, it is a blank cheque to the company under contract. CDP was advised of this many times. And was pressed on this very point in March 1999 by the Defence Committee. And admitted it. (So think about what was too embarrassing not to admit).
This edict would have placed MoD in default on ANY aircraft/equipment programme, and was seen as a sneaky way to chop the defence budget. Not by coincidence, at the same time he announced 600 redundancies among technical project managers. And why not? They'd have nothing to do. But at the same time, the same staff were told they must still meet time, cost and performance.
What to do? Ignore CDP or... ignore CDP. Some chose wisely and delivered to TC&P. Others chose... wisely?... and advanced, their only 'achievement' being to follow orders and cancel programmes, or withdraw support leaving the project office to do their work. This especially applied to Service HQs, whose job it is to manage GFX. All the project office does is insert the GFX annex in the contract, and provide a degree of support.
The current situation on UKMFTS can be no surprise, as it will have been #1 risk since inception. The only question was how much would be wasted.
Additional MFTS Contract for rear crew
Possible jobs for retired WSOs near Culdrose
UKMFTS Contract Awarded to Ascent Flight Training | Joint Forces News (joint-forces.com)
Possible jobs for retired WSOs near Culdrose
UKMFTS Contract Awarded to Ascent Flight Training | Joint Forces News (joint-forces.com)
The following users liked this post:
Additional MFTS Contract for rear crew
Possible jobs for retired WSOs near Culdrose
UKMFTS Contract Awarded to Ascent Flight Training | Joint Forces News (joint-forces.com)
Possible jobs for retired WSOs near Culdrose
UKMFTS Contract Awarded to Ascent Flight Training | Joint Forces News (joint-forces.com)
https://ascentflighttraining.com/125...nd-local-jobs/
As the aircraft OSD is being pushed back to 2033 (the expiry date of the current UKMFTS contract) I assume the intention is they will be used for the follow on FIRCTS programme - for which Ascent hosted:
' (...) an Industry Day, with a PQQ to follow for procuring Ground Based Training Equipment and Aircraft Service Provision to support the delivery of the future of Mission Aircrew Training at RNAS Culdrose and RAFC Cranwell. Through a long-term private partnership arrangement with the UK MOD, Ascent provide an integrated UK Military Flying Training System supported by the best providers.'
Last edited by SLXOwft; 7th Jun 2023 at 19:55. Reason: I am corrected to Am I and add WSOps
There's (rightly) a lot of emphasis on pilot training in the thread, but since wsop training has been mentioned... How long roughly is it taking to get an abo crewman/lady from haircut* to D cat?
*I suspect you're not allowed to march em down to the barber any more but you get my drift.
CG
*I suspect you're not allowed to march em down to the barber any more but you get my drift.
CG
There's (rightly) a lot of emphasis on pilot training in the thread, but since wsop training has been mentioned... How long roughly is it taking to get an abo crewman/lady from haircut* to D cat?
*I suspect you're not allowed to march em down to the barber any more but you get my drift.
CG
*I suspect you're not allowed to march em down to the barber any more but you get my drift.
CG
But around a couple of years, maybe 3 for some (the ones going to 51 Sqn) is fairly common. The same for WSOs going to the ISTAR types.
