Not-so-woke Reds

[Diff Tail Shim]

Originally Posted by cynicalint

I refer you all to the Flight Safety film 'Distractions' starring Richard O'Sullivan. The principle held good then and holds good today. Social mores may have changed, but personal concerns are the same now as they were then. Flight safety comprises many factors, the least obvious will never be proven to prevent an incident, as accidents avoided can NEVER be attributed to any FS activity. Personal states-of-mind of each individual is paramount to safety, Langleybaston is right, if the working atmosphere is right, then operations will be right. That is a responsibility of command, if standards are ignored because of reputation, or reputation prevents effective standards being applied, flight safety will always be compromised. The biggest threat to flight safety, is the attitude that we are too good be affected by flight Safety, is dangerous. In the air, the RAFAT approach to safety is unsurpassed; however, in the support aspects, it would appear that some distractions have been ignored.

Distractions was filmed at Coltishall with Jaguars of 54 Sqn. Richard O'Sullivan wasn't in it.

[Diff Tail Shim]

Originally Posted by stevef

I'm genuinely interested in who should clean up after them. Does the RAF still have the Trade Assistant General group? I can't imagine airmen of any technical or admin trade being impressed by having to carry out domestic duties that are considered too menial for aircrew. Or perhaps catering staff and dish-washing machines should be allocated to squadron crewrooms?

It is the 21st century. Most Officers I knew in the late 20th century knew what a broom was and how to use on if required. Most had to clean a uni house out to get their deposit back.

[Timelord]

This is not a question of having someone “who should clean up after them”, it is a question of highly trained and very expensive aircrew spending their time on administrative tasks that could easily be done by someone less highly trained and cheaper. This was identified as a factor in the accident in question and is a serious problem across the fast jet force(I can’t speak for other forces). As I have said elsewhere, the withdrawal of this sort of support has led to FJ aircrew regularly working 12++ hour days despite only flying 6-8/ hours a month. It is a major factor in pushing people out of the service. You could pay a couple of admin clerks and a cook / cleaner for decades for the cost of training one new pilot.

Anyway, this isn’t really the point of this thread!

[Mover1983]

Perhaps there is a need to bring back the ACHGD (Aircraft Hand General Duties), usually found painting curb stones or polishing door knobs!
At my selection board one such, bearing two good conduct stripes, said "Don't do it lad". I ignored his advice.

[Bob Viking]

Timelord

It might not be the point of this thread but you have hit the nail squarely on the head.

The idea of returning from my many years of globe trotting to a UK flying job where that was what I would have been looking forward to was absolute anathema.

I know I keep saying money IS the answer (despite the party line) but the queep could largely be fixed for free and nobody is doing anything about it from what I can see and hear.

I keep relating the fact that I used to fly a knackered old aircraft and absolutely loved it and would have kept doing it until I retired. Nowadays our young crews have some truly world beating aircraft and they’re bored of it after 3-6 years. That should speak volumes if anyone was listening.

BV

[Professor Plum]

Another + 1 for what timelord said above.

I’m not a FJ person. It’s the same across other streams too.

[langleybaston]

Originally Posted by Mover1983

Perhaps there is a need to bring back the ACHGD (Aircraft Hand General Duties), usually found painting curb stones or polishing door knobs!
At my selection board one such, bearing two good conduct stripes, said "Don't do it lad". I ignored his advice.

Please when were good conduct badges (chevron point up, lower left sleeve) last seen worn?
my LAC RAFVR father wore one on demob 1945

[alfred_the_great]

Originally Posted by Timelord

This is not a question of having someone “who should clean up after them”, it is a question of highly trained and very expensive aircrew spending their time on administrative tasks that could easily be done by someone less highly trained and cheaper. This was identified as a factor in the accident in question and is a serious problem across the fast jet force(I can’t speak for other forces). As I have said elsewhere, the withdrawal of this sort of support has led to FJ aircrew regularly working 12++ hour days despite only flying 6-8/ hours a month. It is a major factor in pushing people out of the service. You could pay a couple of admin clerks and a cook / cleaner for decades for the cost of training one new pilot.

Anyway, this isn’t really the point of this thread!

so why are they Officers? Make them Junior Aviators with an appropriate pay packet.

[Old_Slartibartfast]

Originally Posted by alfred_the_great

so why are they Officers? Make them Junior Aviators with an appropriate pay packet.

Wasn't this a change made sometime in the early 1950's, that got rid of all non-commissioned pilots?

My late father-in-law was a non-commissioned pilot, trained at RAF Heany IIRC. Not long after joining he was commissioned, because of this policy change, I believe.

[MPN11]

Originally Posted by Timelord

This is not a question of having someone “who should clean up after them”, it is a question of highly trained and very expensive aircrew spending their time on administrative tasks that could easily be done by someone less highly trained and cheaper.

Which is why, in the 80s, a whole bunch of GD(ATC) officers went to do 'other things' to release expensive Aircrew into the wild [sorry, wide blue yonder]. A bunch of us ended doing Int, Arms Control, War Plans and Policy and other stuff. Pay Pilots extra, go and be a Pilot.

Support staff was always deemed a luxury by Establishment Reviews. Whata a mistaka to makea.

[Timelord]

Originally Posted by alfred_the_great

so why are they Officers? Make them Junior Aviators with an appropriate pay packet.

Because they should be spending their time taking on huge responsibilities for multi million pound aircraft and the life or death of people on the ground. Not trying to source a printer cartridge or chasing up the sandwhich order.

[wiggy]

…But as I recall it wasn’t ones proficiency (or not) at procuring said cartridge or sandwich seen by the wheels as more of an indicator of one’s future potential than what you actually did in the day job?

[charliegolf]

If they are run that ragged do they grope, harass and/or impregnate junior ranks to de-stress? Asking for a barrister.

CG

[Old_Slartibartfast]

It gets complicated when you look at procurement of aircraft, though. I ran an aircraft procurement programme for a time. The most valuable contributions, bar none, came from the pilots, observers and engineers in the team. They had first hand experience of what was needed, and more importantly, what was key to ensuring the maximum number of cabs were serviceable under challenging operational conditions. They were, without any shadow of doubt, the most important people in the team.

Without their contribution key decisions would have been made 100% by the bean counters. They played a key role in addressing that imbalance, and arguing forcefully for the things they knew were key. Worth every penny of their training cost, just for that knowledge and experience. Also resulted in a tremendous amount of conflict, though, particularly when it came to affordability.

[Bergerie1]

It was the same in a Big Airline too.

[Lyneham Lad]

"Nibbled to death by ducks" as Air Clues articles used to say...

[langleybaston]

Originally Posted by MPN11

Which is why, in the 80s, a whole bunch of GD(ATC) officers went to do 'other things' to release expensive Aircrew into the wild [sorry, wide blue yonder]. A bunch of us ended doing Int, Arms Control, Water Plans and Policy and other stuff. Pay Pilots extra, go and be a Pilot.

Support staff was always deemed a luxury by Establishment Reviews. Whata a mistaka to makea.

Establishment Reviews always assumed that the station/ section was trying to pull a fast one, thus the only survival tactic was to try to pull a fast one.
In my little world a 24/7/356 Met Office needed 6 forecasters to keep one on duty permanently/ allow 30 minute handovers, 6 weeks leave, professional courses, often a lecturing commitment and [negligible] sick leave.
We usually got 5.6 forecasters, a totally false economy because gapping was unforgiveable [it NEVER EVER HAPPENED] so Joe Bloggs was sent from another station costing travel, subsistence and all the rest. Meanwhile Bloggs's station racked up so much potential "Long Hours Gratuity" for the survivors that a third station became involved to save the cost of paying out.
I know well that this does not fit the military model but illustrates that bean counters ruled then, rule now and make for inefficiencies and indeed safety hazards.

The only area that was cut a little slack was RAFG, simply because of the logistics of reinforcing from UK.

Establishers? I've shat them.

[beardy]

Originally Posted by wiggy

…But as I recall it wasn’t ones proficiency (or not) at procuring said cartridge or sandwich seen by the wheels as more of an indicator of one’s future potential than what you actually did in the day job?

I do believe that you have it in a nutshell

[Thoughtful_Flyer]

And the latest instalment

This time claiming to have evidence of the attempts to cover up......

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...dal-false.html

If true, then it is to be hoped that all those involved will be dismissed too.

[mahogany bob]

o Me

BLAND

The RAF I knew was full of eccentrics- aircrew who lived life to the full ,loved flying and worked ,when necessary,24/7

A can do attitude prevailed,squadron morale was high- and the Reds ( love them or hate them) were admired (and envied) by us all. Their skill acquired by HARD WEEKEND WORK was the envy of all who love aviation. They were ,and still are,the stars of the show and most of us would love to have been good enough to be selected for THE team.

Everyone knew that they were prima donna but no one really cared a stuff! It was all part of a healthy inter unit rivalry,

They are the envy of other forces and endlessly ,with their faultless displays ,show the RAF off at its best.

Do we really want to disband this team,the pride of the nation,and end up with a bland - politically correct- woke force of nonentity?

t43562

Not that this matters but I find this reminds me a lot of the 3rd world that I come from - where rules and standards apply only to the hoi polloi. It's almost the classic response to accusations of corruption back there: "they" (meaning politicians or connected businessmen etc) are too important to have to obey the law, let alone common decencies.

me

A TOTALLY irrelevant reply !!

Langleybastion

I disagree, probably because I understand the reply's relevance.



SO you compare the extremely bad behaviour of a couple of RA pilots with 3rd world CORRUPT politicians and businessmen !!

You can’t be serious!


Also LB what I find difficult to stomach is your constant biting criticism of the Reds -having never experienced in your warm met office the severe pressures and stress that they regularly experienced !


PS - reading todays papers ,which have opened other cans of worms, this sorry affair seems to have been handled extremely badly!