Next CAS
Finnningly Boy
Amalgamate the forces- Oh no not that again !
Well we know that it will never happen as there are far too many comfortable jobs up top! (more Admirals than ships ). The new CAS will never vote himself out of a job.
BUT with only 158,000 men in uniform do we need such a top heavy 3 pronged system - With the 3 arms fighting over a very small pie.
Inter service squabbles contributed to binning the Harrier early and buying 2 carriers which some think are very expensive luxuries!
Amalgamate the forces- Oh no not that again !
Well we know that it will never happen as there are far too many comfortable jobs up top! (more Admirals than ships ). The new CAS will never vote himself out of a job.
BUT with only 158,000 men in uniform do we need such a top heavy 3 pronged system - With the 3 arms fighting over a very small pie.
Inter service squabbles contributed to binning the Harrier early and buying 2 carriers which some think are very expensive luxuries!
FB
The following users liked this post:
Finnningly Boy
Amalgamate the forces- Oh no not that again !
Well we know that it will never happen as there are far too many comfortable jobs up top! (more Admirals than ships ). The new CAS will never vote himself out of a job.
BUT with only 158,000 men in uniform do we need such a top heavy 3 pronged system - With the 3 arms fighting over a very small pie.
Inter service squabbles contributed to binning the Harrier early and buying 2 carriers which some think are very expensive luxuries!
Amalgamate the forces- Oh no not that again !
Well we know that it will never happen as there are far too many comfortable jobs up top! (more Admirals than ships ). The new CAS will never vote himself out of a job.
BUT with only 158,000 men in uniform do we need such a top heavy 3 pronged system - With the 3 arms fighting over a very small pie.
Inter service squabbles contributed to binning the Harrier early and buying 2 carriers which some think are very expensive luxuries!
Where unification worked was in the support side. Do you need Army, Navy and Air Force doctors or just military doctors. Same with a lot of the supply, personnel and logistics functions.
Where it failed utterly was recruiting. Having a purple recruiting system produces a purple Private/Able Seaman/Airman with no connection to their service at the most impressionable time.
Where it should have worked but hasn’t is joint procurement. What was supposed to happen was the development of a hierarchy of requirements ranked by importance to the CAF, not by individual service desires. Unfortunate while there is a joint requirement’s organization reporting to the VCDS, in practice capability and capacity development is mired in constant zero sum inter service rivalry.
The following 2 users liked this post by Big Pistons Forever:
It seems like you and I are playing two sides of the same game. My belief that a non aircrew Officer should not be the head of the UK Military Air Arm seems to be just as entrenched as your belief that Aircrew don’t know how to lead.
I actually hope that I am proven wrong though. I suspect that your mind would never be changed.
BV
I actually hope that I am proven wrong though. I suspect that your mind would never be changed.
BV
Thanks NaB. For some reason I must have had regularity on my mind, though can't think why you understand. I'll leave it as posted as a warning to self to proof read before hitting send...
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 29,988
Received 1,364 Likes
on
613 Posts
It seems like you and I are playing two sides of the same game. My belief that a non aircrew Officer should not be the head of the UK Military Air Arm seems to be just as entrenched as your belief that Aircrew don’t know how to lead.
I actually hope that I am proven wrong though. I suspect that your mind would never be changed.
BV
I actually hope that I am proven wrong though. I suspect that your mind would never be changed.
BV
The following users liked this post:
To select a CAS who has been a pilot, the RAF must first train pilots! The engineer should be given a fair crack. He can't be any worse, and is likely to bring a more balanced view.
The following 5 users liked this post by dervish:
Seems to be sorted: https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles...the-air-staff/
As long as it is best person for the job and not just some milestone wokery "...As the first ground branch officer to command his Service, his appointment marks a new milestone for the Royal Air Force.”
As long as it is best person for the job and not just some milestone wokery "...As the first ground branch officer to command his Service, his appointment marks a new milestone for the Royal Air Force.”
The following 3 users liked this post by Miles Magister:
The following users liked this post:
(Disclaimer: this is very much an outsider's view)
In the late 80's, a wise (then Wing Commander) future AOC 1 Group wrote of the disconnect between junior officers and VSOs in the Royal Air Force and the affect this had on retention of promising leaders. In focussing on pilots he highlighted that unlike future army and navy VSOs they didn't get experience of command, particularly the man management elements, until they achieved squadron command. For those on the path to VSO, their time in these and similar posts is short before promotion to air rank. As a ENGO maybe the new CAS has spent more time in close contact with the rank and file, and will take advantage of this experience that the career paths his pilot and (as Union Jack pointed out, a single navigator in Lord Peach) predecessors couldn't benefit from. I hope that constant expeditionary operations have helped aircrew officers in at least having closer contact with others. I would also hope that in the thirty years following the document referred to above document, the RAF has taken a serious look at what its junior officers need to experience to make successful VSOs and is taking action to implement the findings.
The previous commander of the UK Field Army Ivan Jones as ex- REME and RE was also in origin an engineer. The Army has always looked at and benefited from the fact that its officers have to perform as combined arms commanders on the road to VSO, having years of experience in single arm command roles, starting from day one.
I don't want to prejudge and wish AM Knighton success as CAS. I just hope he has the moral strength to stand up any future political fashions that prevent the Air Force being efficient in performing its primary role.
In the late 80's, a wise (then Wing Commander) future AOC 1 Group wrote of the disconnect between junior officers and VSOs in the Royal Air Force and the affect this had on retention of promising leaders. In focussing on pilots he highlighted that unlike future army and navy VSOs they didn't get experience of command, particularly the man management elements, until they achieved squadron command. For those on the path to VSO, their time in these and similar posts is short before promotion to air rank. As a ENGO maybe the new CAS has spent more time in close contact with the rank and file, and will take advantage of this experience that the career paths his pilot and (as Union Jack pointed out, a single navigator in Lord Peach) predecessors couldn't benefit from. I hope that constant expeditionary operations have helped aircrew officers in at least having closer contact with others. I would also hope that in the thirty years following the document referred to above document, the RAF has taken a serious look at what its junior officers need to experience to make successful VSOs and is taking action to implement the findings.
The previous commander of the UK Field Army Ivan Jones as ex- REME and RE was also in origin an engineer. The Army has always looked at and benefited from the fact that its officers have to perform as combined arms commanders on the road to VSO, having years of experience in single arm command roles, starting from day one.
I don't want to prejudge and wish AM Knighton success as CAS. I just hope he has the moral strength to stand up any future political fashions that prevent the Air Force being efficient in performing its primary role.
The following 3 users liked this post by SLXOwft:
Clearly the right man for the job if you look at his impressive CV. He has filled top jobs with distinction. The so-called "lack of medals"/brevet arguements put forward elsewhere are irrelevant. "Best man for the job" is what matters and RK fits the bill. Let us be honest please: we have had some fairly poor fast jet CAS incumbents in the past 40 years.
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 29,988
Received 1,364 Likes
on
613 Posts
As said above so eloquently by Slxowf, pilots do not tend to get an understanding of command until they reach flight commander / Sqn boss ranks, where as a junior engineering officer would tend to be put in charge of troops straight off, hopefully it has given him a good grounding and he remembers those days at the coal face, has learnt from them and can project it forward.
The following users liked this post:
Does this 23 year old hear charges, sort family issues out etc etc.
I’d take a seasoned EngO over most aircrew, they have to do people as well as power sets.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 29,988
Received 1,364 Likes
on
613 Posts
Oh, so you don’t get it! What command? Crew of 11, captain writes on who, captain has overall guidance of what? Silly, if not infantile first post.
Does this 23 year old hear charges, sort family issues out etc etc.
I’d take a seasoned EngO over most aircrew, they have to do people as well as power sets.
Does this 23 year old hear charges, sort family issues out etc etc.
I’d take a seasoned EngO over most aircrew, they have to do people as well as power sets.
The following users liked this post:
When I went through training as an airman, Ground Comms fitter, at Locking, at least 2 of the FLTCDR's were aircrew FLTLT. Apparently it was a standard thing back in the 70's and gave aircrew that much need experience.
I understand that it gradually disappeared as we became a bit short of aircew!!
I understand that it gradually disappeared as we became a bit short of aircew!!
I don't know enough about exAscoteer2's point to comment but transport, ISTAR. and tanker aircrew officers are absent from the list of CsAS whose careers started after WW2. The research for paper I referred to was by its nature only able to concentrate one particular group and written by an FJ pilot; I assume he naturally looked at the officer career path he had most experience of.
The last CAS with experience of multi-engined fixed wing aircraft with a big crew was MRAF Lord Craig and he was an FJ pilot until he joined 35 as a flight commander. The last one whose career started in them was MRAF Sir Michael Beetham (who left the office just over 40 years ago and was originally a WW2 RAFVR officer). I am deliberately excluding Canberra/Wessex pilot MRAF Sir Peter Harding as I assume exA's point wouldn't apply.
The last CAS with experience of multi-engined fixed wing aircraft with a big crew was MRAF Lord Craig and he was an FJ pilot until he joined 35 as a flight commander. The last one whose career started in them was MRAF Sir Michael Beetham (who left the office just over 40 years ago and was originally a WW2 RAFVR officer). I am deliberately excluding Canberra/Wessex pilot MRAF Sir Peter Harding as I assume exA's point wouldn't apply.
I never really understood the Royal Navy's habit of giving command of random selections of ratings to aircrew officers. I can see that they (the officers) would get early exposure to the disciplinary system and the opportunity to provide the leadership, counselling and guidance that is expected from JO's; it just seems that if there is a disconnect between the rating's work supervisor and their Oi/c general welfare-and-discip, they might be able to play one off against the other. Avoidance of the "One Person 2 Bosses" thing and all that. I would be interested in a considered opinion from someone who had experience of that system, by way of comparison with the way things are done with RAF JO aircrew.
There have been really good RAF Ground Branch officers who have risen to appropriate rank based on their skill as officers and leaders - Sue Gray being a recent prime example.
There have been really good RAF Ground Branch officers who have risen to appropriate rank based on their skill as officers and leaders - Sue Gray being a recent prime example.
