Can Wigston survive the onslaught?
The mere fact they refer to it a a RAF Board Meeting tells you all you need to know that they are treating the RAF as some sort of corporate entity.
Someone has got to look at whats happening in Ukraine and wake up and smell the coffee, and stop trying to turn all the Armed Services into some trendy corporate plaything.
Someone has got to look at whats happening in Ukraine and wake up and smell the coffee, and stop trying to turn all the Armed Services into some trendy corporate plaything.
Hard to see how this can all be resolved. If you are currently serving and are focused on the delivery of hard air power you will be turned off by all the talk of quotas and “‘wokery”. If, on the other hand, you are focused on delivering diversity and inclusivity you will be turned off by the antedeluvian behaviour reported in the Red Arrows.
I fear it needs a new CAS and a new start where the only thing that matters is preparing to fight the Russians and the Chinese. That is the job of the UK armed forces at the moment. Everything else is fluff.
I fear it needs a new CAS and a new start where the only thing that matters is preparing to fight the Russians and the Chinese. That is the job of the UK armed forces at the moment. Everything else is fluff.
Last edited by Diff Tail Shim; 26th Aug 2022 at 22:06.
The mere fact they refer to it a a RAF Board Meeting tells you all you need to know that they are treating the RAF as some sort of corporate entity.
Someone has got to look at whats happening in Ukraine and wake up and smell the coffee, and stop trying to turn all the Armed Services into some trendy corporate plaything.
Someone has got to look at whats happening in Ukraine and wake up and smell the coffee, and stop trying to turn all the Armed Services into some trendy corporate plaything.
Yes the Air Force Board, been in existence since well before I joined the RAF nearly 40 years ago!!! In fact, formed 2 years before I was born!!! You really didn't pay attention to how the RAF is actually run during your service career did you??? It was the Air Council / Air Force Council before that from 1917 onwards. The Army and Navy have Boards as well!!!
Anyway, feel free to disagree. I probably haven't explained it very well, trying to describe a change in culture, and one I left years ago. As I said earlier, change is inevitable, and I saw lots in my fairly lengthy RAF career, I just didn't view the drive towards commercial attitudes and procedures as a positive one for a fighting force that is intended to send people in harms way when required.
I believe back in the days of RAFG, on arrival new personnel were driven to the border and shown the "iron curtain", watch towers, guards, barbed wire, etc - with the simple message "that's why you're here". While such obvious symbols aren't available today, in a world of ever changing circumstances and shadowy wars against terrorism, I personally don't have much faith that many of the VSOs running today's RAF still "know why they're there" - in my opinion they're too busy padding out their CVs, creating their LinkedIn accounts and making sure they avoid any fallout from bad news.... no doubt other on here disagree (and will do so).
Last edited by Biggus; 27th Aug 2022 at 08:32.
Biggus - I'm sure you know this but you've just perfectly paraphrased the Nimrod Review. Another of its recommendations that MoD ignored.
Mainjafad - Correct about Boards, and replacing 'Board Submissions' (seeking approval FROM THE USER'S VIEWPOINT to acquire capability) was replaced with 'Business Cases', at a stroke utterly confusing staff because the wrong people then took it upon themselves to sign them. A bloody industry was born, which contributes absolutely nothing.
Mainjafad - Correct about Boards, and replacing 'Board Submissions' (seeking approval FROM THE USER'S VIEWPOINT to acquire capability) was replaced with 'Business Cases', at a stroke utterly confusing staff because the wrong people then took it upon themselves to sign them. A bloody industry was born, which contributes absolutely nothing.
I believe back in the days of RAFG, on arrival new personnel were driven to the border and shown the "iron curtain", watch towers, guards, barbed wire, etc - with the simple message "that's why you're here".
On a lighter note, for our three tours we were told the whereabouts of the nearest PX, Karstadt and a store where Abwicklungscheine were accepted!
On a lighter note, for our three tours we were told the whereabouts of the nearest PX, Karstadt and a store where Abwicklungscheine were accepted!
Last edited by langleybaston; 27th Aug 2022 at 12:43. Reason: clarity
The ‘corporate’ (Sorry ‘Air Force’ is the wrong phrase these days) line is exactly the same today as it was back in the 80s when MoDUKAiR started down the slippery slope of compromising safety to achieve cost savings. The mantra back then was you don’t have to be knowledgeable to ‘run’ an authority. Just need to be a Manager. In my own little world, A Wg Cdr Engineer (with at least some knowledge of rubber and leatherware) was replaced by a Supplier (very nice chap) just before the dept became an ‘Integrated Project Team’ and moved up to WYTON. At least he had the knowledgeable but lower level staff remaining IMHO The Thin end of the wedge. The IPT became more and more concerned with cost saving and economising . Technical knowledge and expertise were driven down to lower levels of ‘management’ and civilian staff, with little or no TK&E were brought in at that level. (Cos they were cheap I expect) Then…higher level CSs rapidly replaced the mid and even senior engineering posts. Again whilst the chaps were technical ‘managers’ they were lacking in specialist knowledge. Thus, the MoD lost all its ‘corporate’ knowledge within a very short time. Sadly, it took some tragic incidents to recently highlight the loss…
So perhaps you could soon get your teeth pulled by a trainee pilot ‘filling’ in time during his MFT holding time, whilst waiting for a course… (I was tempted to put ‘gapping’ …)
IGMC
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 30,947
Received 1,748 Likes
on
752 Posts
I suspect that was the reason why the JT rank went, cost savings, why have a direct entry JT when you could get the same person and get the first couple of years out of him for a lower wage.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: anglesey
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you would be surprised by the number of retired senior officers who are the CEs of professional and trade bodies, as well of bursars (COOs) of universities and Oxbridge collages.
One is surprised that one was thought to be surprised.
The last few years of a VSO career are seemingly not spent doing one's job, correcting the errors of predecessors, contemplating golf and a yacht on a super pension, but on feathering the nest.
There used to be a moratorium* on visiting WP countries for several years after retirement if one had held PV or higher. A moratorium on taking a job for a year or two for one stars and above would cool their courage.
*["Moratorium in not quite the word I seek but is near enough].
The last few years of a VSO career are seemingly not spent doing one's job, correcting the errors of predecessors, contemplating golf and a yacht on a super pension, but on feathering the nest.
There used to be a moratorium* on visiting WP countries for several years after retirement if one had held PV or higher. A moratorium on taking a job for a year or two for one stars and above would cool their courage.
*["Moratorium in not quite the word I seek but is near enough].
B I, I'm (or rather was) in the plank brigade but I could follow your drift and share your despair. The RAF's purpose is war, when it isn't at war it should be preparing for war. The support it gets from industry and commerce should enable it in that purpose. The leadership of the RAF should be directed principally at that purpose, all other considerations are secondary. Thus training and equipment must be of the highest calibre to ensure that the RAF can prevail in war. If it is not then we are simply being prepared for defeat by a rival air force. There seems little point in that so we need to employ every tool available, and I completely endorse your call for a return to traditional military airmanship in all its guises. It is more vital than ever, given the problems that abound in military airworthiness now (cue the apologists).
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 30,947
Received 1,748 Likes
on
752 Posts
So you’re in the trenches and the invading hordes come charging over the hill, what do you do, shoot xyz of white men then stop shooting in the hope you will be able to kill xyz amount of coloured people and women to ensure you are meeting your diversity quotas and cannot be seen to be racist. I suppose with a full mag you can break down the numbers of rounds required to meet ones quota.
The cover up needs to stop and be owned up to. Reform of Air Regulation and Accident Investigation must follow, independent of the MOD and of each other. Then attention needs to focus on the RAF CoC outside of the station gates, because the present system clearly doesn't work for maintaining UK Air Power.
Yes, though I wouldn't presume to paraphrase BI's post. Suffice it to say Roland probably has it right, that critical references to a contracting company offended PPRuNe policy. So be it, their pram, their toys. In any case the point of what BI had to say was that contracting out such a core activity as the flight training of RAF aircrew, changes the traditional military aspects (he instanced military airmanship) of instruction. The common factor with the other major concern affecting the future conduct of UK Air Power, that of airworthiness, is of course the RAF leadership. The combination of maintaining the cover up of past VSO sabotage of UK Military Air Safety, and the feathering of nests involved in contracting out core activities, does not bode well for our future struggles for air superiority. The VSOs involved will no doubt be long gone, but their malevolent bequests will haunt the RAF for decades.
The cover up needs to stop and be owned up to. Reform of Air Regulation and Accident Investigation must follow, independent of the MOD and of each other. Then attention needs to focus on the RAF CoC outside of the station gates, because the present system clearly doesn't work for maintaining UK Air Power.
The cover up needs to stop and be owned up to. Reform of Air Regulation and Accident Investigation must follow, independent of the MOD and of each other. Then attention needs to focus on the RAF CoC outside of the station gates, because the present system clearly doesn't work for maintaining UK Air Power.
