Red Arrows - toxic culture
The RAF is not in the business of airshow attendance or showing off it's history.
Disband the RAFAT as the personnel are desperately needed elsewhere . Although perhaps convert to training Ukrainian Pilots?
BBMF well there are plenty of Spitfires and Hurricanes in civilian hands that the public can easily see so no need for the RAF to maintain a fleet.
The Lanc is a bit more tricky but I'd explore putting it in a partnership with civilian ownership.
To aid recruiting I'd dedicate a Puma (or other helicopter but the Puma is the perfect size) to fly to 3 or 4 high schools every school day and give a short talk on the Air Force and fly the top physics pupils on a short hop.
I'd put money it would have far more effect on recruiting than the RAFAT but also pull in just the caliber of People the RAF needs - also at a fraction of the cost of the RAFAT.
Disband the RAFAT as the personnel are desperately needed elsewhere . Although perhaps convert to training Ukrainian Pilots?
BBMF well there are plenty of Spitfires and Hurricanes in civilian hands that the public can easily see so no need for the RAF to maintain a fleet.
The Lanc is a bit more tricky but I'd explore putting it in a partnership with civilian ownership.
To aid recruiting I'd dedicate a Puma (or other helicopter but the Puma is the perfect size) to fly to 3 or 4 high schools every school day and give a short talk on the Air Force and fly the top physics pupils on a short hop.
I'd put money it would have far more effect on recruiting than the RAFAT but also pull in just the caliber of People the RAF needs - also at a fraction of the cost of the RAFAT.
The following users liked this post:
The RAF is not in the business of airshow attendance or showing off it's history.
Disband the RAFAT as the personnel are desperately needed elsewhere . Although perhaps convert to training Ukrainian Pilots?
BBMF well there are plenty of Spitfires and Hurricanes in civilian hands that the public can easily see so no need for the RAF to maintain a fleet.
The Lanc is a bit more tricky but I'd explore putting it in a partnership with civilian ownership.
To aid recruiting I'd dedicate a Puma (or other helicopter but the Puma is the perfect size) to fly to 3 or 4 high schools every school day and give a short talk on the Air Force and fly the top physics pupils on a short hop.
I'd put money it would have far more effect on recruiting than the RAFAT but also pull in just the caliber of People the RAF needs - also at a fraction of the cost of the RAFAT.
Disband the RAFAT as the personnel are desperately needed elsewhere . Although perhaps convert to training Ukrainian Pilots?
BBMF well there are plenty of Spitfires and Hurricanes in civilian hands that the public can easily see so no need for the RAF to maintain a fleet.
The Lanc is a bit more tricky but I'd explore putting it in a partnership with civilian ownership.
To aid recruiting I'd dedicate a Puma (or other helicopter but the Puma is the perfect size) to fly to 3 or 4 high schools every school day and give a short talk on the Air Force and fly the top physics pupils on a short hop.
I'd put money it would have far more effect on recruiting than the RAFAT but also pull in just the caliber of People the RAF needs - also at a fraction of the cost of the RAFAT.
The following 2 users liked this post by Martin the Martian:
Maybe the Helicopter landing would have been different. I’m at that age now that and was lucky enough to have gone to a school that we got a Leuchars Whirlwind then Wessex come once a year, then some of us got the opportunity to fly in a Puma around 1977 with the school. I ended up with the AAC though and took a Gazelle back mid 80s with a Brigadier to encourage the younger generation.
Not so.
BBMF is fully funded by MoD. As the RAF website quotes : "The BBMF is a regular RAF unit, manned by service personnel and funded by the Ministry of Defence."
Not that I'm against the BBMF funding model by the way. In the great scheme of things it's probably unimportant. But it is - unlike the others - wholly funded by the MoD.
BBMF is fully funded by MoD. As the RAF website quotes : "The BBMF is a regular RAF unit, manned by service personnel and funded by the Ministry of Defence."
Not that I'm against the BBMF funding model by the way. In the great scheme of things it's probably unimportant. But it is - unlike the others - wholly funded by the MoD.
MoD pays the following full time personnel purely to manage, operate, administer and maintain the Memorial Flight;
1. The OC.
2. A handful of admin/ops personnel.
3. The engineering/logistics staff.
MoD pays the following personnel, not to participate in the Memorial Flight, but to crew Typhoon, Atlas, Phenom, etc in operational and training roles; to manage and command flights and squadrons operating those aircraft, and to man operational training establishments. These personnel, in addition to their normal duties, volunteer to operate the Flight's aircraft at weekends and on days-off from their full-time paid duties:
1. All of the fighter pilots except the OC.
2. All of the multi-engine pilots.
3. All of the loadmasters.
4. All of the navigators.
5. All of the flight engineers.
MoD funds the direct operating costs with regard to operation, maintenance and airworthiness only of the Flight's aircraft.
MoD does not fund any costs relating to their representation of historically significant embellishments (eg; restoration of turrets and facsimile ammunition belts; engine exhaust flame-suppressors). This is all privately funded from charitable donations.
It may be apocryphal, but a close family member who was on the staff of the Flight advised me that the total MoD budget for the Memorial Flight amounted to 4-times the annual cost of RAFAT's smoke.
The following users liked this post:
Maybe the Helicopter landing would have been different. I’m at that age now that and was lucky enough to have gone to a school that we got a Leuchars Whirlwind then Wessex come once a year, then some of us got the opportunity to fly in a Puma around 1977 with the school. I ended up with the AAC though and took a Gazelle back mid 80s with a Brigadier to encourage the younger generation.
I'm not sure that turning up at a school in a 50+ year old helicopter (albeit updated since 1968, but still a pretty old aircraft design), in order to tell a handful of pupils that they might be able to fly the thing in 6 years' time, would have them beating a path to the recruiting officer's door.....
At my prep school a Hunter pilot from Chivenor came to give us a chat, showing us a single seat liferaft, bone dome, oxygen mask, g-suit etc... Then he came back to visit a few days later - at 250ft and 420 kts! THAT was motivating!
At my prep school a Hunter pilot from Chivenor came to give us a chat, showing us a single seat liferaft, bone dome, oxygen mask, g-suit etc... Then he came back to visit a few days later - at 250ft and 420 kts! THAT was motivating!
Fair enough - but that was then - bit short of Hunters (or any fast jets hours ) today!
The RAFAT (or BBMF) are not the right tools to get teenagers to want to join the RAF/ Military - far from it.
Disclaimer - I'm not a flyer or forces, so forgive me for posting it here. I thought it was relevant to the thread.
Narcissism, immorality and lack of empathy: the dark psychology that can poison elites
Sexism, harassment and bullying plague the Red Arrows, the UK Royal Air Force’s display team. This revelation was the outcome of investigations into complaints of bad behaviour in this elite organisation. Air Chief Marshal Sir Rich Knighton said that “behaviour that would be classed as unacceptable was widespread and normalised on the squadron”.
To me, the Red Arrows have always represented discipline, precision, skill, bravery and professionalism. They are the real-life Top Guns. Now, I’ll never be able to look at red, white and blue trails in the sky in quite the same way.
As a psychologist, I should perhaps be less shocked. Many of us suffer from a particular cognitive bias that involves projecting the characteristics of a role onto the people who play that role. But just because the Red Arrows display discipline and professionalism doesn’t mean all individual members of the team will have those same characteristics.
Elites are, by definition, highly selected both in terms of skills and psychological characteristics.
In a military setting, such traits include mental toughness, which can also come with a certain emotional coldness. This helps an individual to stay calm under pressure and to focus on the task in hand rather than on other people. Other people’s wellbeing may therefore not be a major priority in a highly competitive, survival-of-the-fittest situation.
Those selected have to be able to operate at the highest level. There is always jeopardy. The top, after all, can be a narrow ledge – precarious and anxiety-producing. As I’ve shown in a recent book, emotional displays and expressions of self-doubt are likely to be highly discouraged among elites.
Bottling up emotions can be psychologically damaging, though. It may reduce our ability to empathise with others. Several studies have also shown that people who have a good grasp of their emotions, noticing them and thinking critically about them, often make better decisions. People who ignore their feelings can, counter-intuitively, end up being more driven by them.
If we don’t realise that we have feelings of fear or self-doubt, because we are discouraged from doing so, we may act out in anger when that uncomfortable sensation hits.
There may be a genetic component to narcissism, but narcissism can develop within an individual over time – and within a culture. Narcissists will need to be at the centre of attention in all spheres of life – not just up there in the sky with the public gaping up at them.
They will require narcissistic attention, accolades and validation in other aspects of life, including their relationships. Narcissists are more likely to switch partners because new partners are always better at giving attention and complimenting them than existing partners.
It seems there was a “high propensity” to engage in extramarital relations in the Red Arrows. This was no doubt partly down to opportunity and the undoubted glamour of the role, but perhaps also attributable to this narcissistic need.
As Colonel Bernd Horn, Deputy Commander of the Canadian Special Operation Forces Command points out in the Canadian Military Journal, elites also breed an in-group mentality that can become “dangerously inwardly focused”. Elites trust only those who know the score and who have passed the same rigorous selection tests that they have.
They therefore become harder to influence from the outside, where behaviour may be perceived more objectively. Objectivity, however, is very important in life.
The belief that you deserve special treatment and are exempted from certain moral obligations can lead to a skewed perspective on right and wrong. The boundaries can become blurred after a while.
Elites are also in a position to prioritise their own interests, driven by this desire, conscious or unconscious, to maintain their status and protect their privileges. Their insularity means that they are often surrounded by like-minded people who share similar values and perspectives and encourage this.
These social circles can influence their moral compass by reinforcing certain beliefs and behaviour, without the necessary critique.
Those of us who are not part of an elite group may also play a part. Some of us may recognise the elite’s position, power and privilege and be unwilling to sanction them because of their perceived importance (in the case of the Red Arrows as iconic representations of national identity). Knighton described this as “bystander culture”, though a better term here might have been “bystander apathy” .
It’s important to keep in mind that these are issues that affect all elites – from politicians and people who went to top schools to social media influencers. Personalities, fed and developed by attention and accolades until they’re dependent on them, may become trapped in an echo chamber of shared values. This often comes with an immunity to criticism from those outside the group who could never understand the pressures of the elite.
So while elites can be very special, it’s not necessarily always in a good way. We should all do our best to call out their bad behaviour.
To me, the Red Arrows have always represented discipline, precision, skill, bravery and professionalism. They are the real-life Top Guns. Now, I’ll never be able to look at red, white and blue trails in the sky in quite the same way.
As a psychologist, I should perhaps be less shocked. Many of us suffer from a particular cognitive bias that involves projecting the characteristics of a role onto the people who play that role. But just because the Red Arrows display discipline and professionalism doesn’t mean all individual members of the team will have those same characteristics.
Lack of self-doubt
Elite groups, be they military or otherwise, present with a particular set of psychological challenges. One is that they often play by different social rules to everyone else. In their entrenched macho culture, women in the Red Arrows squadron were viewed as “property”.Elites are, by definition, highly selected both in terms of skills and psychological characteristics.
In a military setting, such traits include mental toughness, which can also come with a certain emotional coldness. This helps an individual to stay calm under pressure and to focus on the task in hand rather than on other people. Other people’s wellbeing may therefore not be a major priority in a highly competitive, survival-of-the-fittest situation.
Those selected have to be able to operate at the highest level. There is always jeopardy. The top, after all, can be a narrow ledge – precarious and anxiety-producing. As I’ve shown in a recent book, emotional displays and expressions of self-doubt are likely to be highly discouraged among elites.
Bottling up emotions can be psychologically damaging, though. It may reduce our ability to empathise with others. Several studies have also shown that people who have a good grasp of their emotions, noticing them and thinking critically about them, often make better decisions. People who ignore their feelings can, counter-intuitively, end up being more driven by them.
If we don’t realise that we have feelings of fear or self-doubt, because we are discouraged from doing so, we may act out in anger when that uncomfortable sensation hits.
Narcissism
Elites also know how special they are. They are told so endlessly. This will feed any inherent narcissistic tendencies.There may be a genetic component to narcissism, but narcissism can develop within an individual over time – and within a culture. Narcissists will need to be at the centre of attention in all spheres of life – not just up there in the sky with the public gaping up at them.
They will require narcissistic attention, accolades and validation in other aspects of life, including their relationships. Narcissists are more likely to switch partners because new partners are always better at giving attention and complimenting them than existing partners.
It seems there was a “high propensity” to engage in extramarital relations in the Red Arrows. This was no doubt partly down to opportunity and the undoubted glamour of the role, but perhaps also attributable to this narcissistic need.
As Colonel Bernd Horn, Deputy Commander of the Canadian Special Operation Forces Command points out in the Canadian Military Journal, elites also breed an in-group mentality that can become “dangerously inwardly focused”. Elites trust only those who know the score and who have passed the same rigorous selection tests that they have.
They therefore become harder to influence from the outside, where behaviour may be perceived more objectively. Objectivity, however, is very important in life.
Moral confusion
Being in an elite group grants access to resources and opportunities others may not have. This, of course, creates a sense of entitlement and privilege, which can further stoke egos of narcissistic people and affect moral decisions.The belief that you deserve special treatment and are exempted from certain moral obligations can lead to a skewed perspective on right and wrong. The boundaries can become blurred after a while.
Elites are also in a position to prioritise their own interests, driven by this desire, conscious or unconscious, to maintain their status and protect their privileges. Their insularity means that they are often surrounded by like-minded people who share similar values and perspectives and encourage this.
These social circles can influence their moral compass by reinforcing certain beliefs and behaviour, without the necessary critique.
Those of us who are not part of an elite group may also play a part. Some of us may recognise the elite’s position, power and privilege and be unwilling to sanction them because of their perceived importance (in the case of the Red Arrows as iconic representations of national identity). Knighton described this as “bystander culture”, though a better term here might have been “bystander apathy” .
It’s important to keep in mind that these are issues that affect all elites – from politicians and people who went to top schools to social media influencers. Personalities, fed and developed by attention and accolades until they’re dependent on them, may become trapped in an echo chamber of shared values. This often comes with an immunity to criticism from those outside the group who could never understand the pressures of the elite.
So while elites can be very special, it’s not necessarily always in a good way. We should all do our best to call out their bad behaviour.
The following 17 users liked this post by artee:
Thread Starter
Sounds like the Government under BoJo
The following 4 users liked this post by Asturias56:
The following users liked this post:
The following users liked this post:
It is interesting looking at this in line with other 'elites'. Russel Brand, Jimmy Saville etc. How much blame do we attribute to individuals and how much to the society and culture that let it happen.
Lesson from the past
Way back I served in a supporting role alongside three different team leaders. Each leader had a totally different personality, but they all directed the team with firm judgement, controlling when the team could let their hair down and when professional focus was paramount to the exclusion of all else. The rules of play were unwritten, but were respected by all, so the team kept (mostly) out of trouble while still having a lot of fun.
Even elitism was self regulated – if anyone got above themselves they were brought down with a bump. This even extended to the team leader. On one occasion the leader arranged for personal reasons for the team to perform an unofficial ‘practice display’ at a well-known golf course where an international competition was in progress. The team pilots judged this to be for personal aggrandisement, which it was, and plotted a comeuppance. So on arrival over the venue, when the leader pulled up and called Diamond Go, everyone else carried straight on and hurried back to base, chuckling as the leader, oblivious he was on his own, continued to display and call formation changes for another couple of minutes. Afterwards he eventually joined in the laugh and acknowledged why the guys had done it.
Strong leadership and mutual respect set up a climate that enabled the team to achieve its aims without needing to be chased with a big stick. It could do again.
Even elitism was self regulated – if anyone got above themselves they were brought down with a bump. This even extended to the team leader. On one occasion the leader arranged for personal reasons for the team to perform an unofficial ‘practice display’ at a well-known golf course where an international competition was in progress. The team pilots judged this to be for personal aggrandisement, which it was, and plotted a comeuppance. So on arrival over the venue, when the leader pulled up and called Diamond Go, everyone else carried straight on and hurried back to base, chuckling as the leader, oblivious he was on his own, continued to display and call formation changes for another couple of minutes. Afterwards he eventually joined in the laugh and acknowledged why the guys had done it.
Strong leadership and mutual respect set up a climate that enabled the team to achieve its aims without needing to be chased with a big stick. It could do again.
The following users liked this post:
So on arrival over the venue, when the leader pulled up and called Diamond Go, everyone else carried straight on and hurried back to base, chuckling as the leader, oblivious he was on his own, continued to display and call formation changes for another couple of minutes.
BV
The following 4 users liked this post by Bob Viking:
I believe its is down to the quality of the Leader. I was once lucky enough to enjoy a day flying with the Reds. This included 2 back-seat sorties which remain, to this day, the most amazing times I've ever had with my clothes on! The Reds' Leader at that time exuded professionalism in everything he said and did and what he did, the team emulated. The whole unit (bar none) was utterly top-class without a hint of superiority to me, a lowly Bulldog QFI and ex-truckie (chopped at TWU). Post-flight, the openness and honesty of both debriefs was jaw dropping, where the team and their Leader almost seemed have an indecent haste to fess-up for minor indiscretions and slips, with not an ounce of elitism or complacency. I am sure it was no co-incidence that, at the time, the Reds had recently regained the reputation for being one of the world's best and most respected aerobatic teams - this was after having spent a few years in the 'relegation zone' of the international premier league of such teams.
Many years later, I found myself working for the same ex Red Leader, where again, he led by example and the unit he was now commanding was working hard to rid itself of a less-than-professional reputation (from before he had arrived as the boss). Whilst he was a prickly character at first and uncomfortable to work for (because he demanded so much of his team and didn't suffer fools). But he never asked you to do anything he wasn't prepared to do himself and he was the hardest worker on that unit, as well as being the most honest and self-effacing of characters (pretty rare for any pilot, never mind a FJ one and Red Leader to boot) - the term 'speak softly but carry a big stick' comes to mind. As mutual respect and understanding grew, I found he became one of only 2 leaders I that have had in my whole aviation career for whom I would have walked barefoot over coals. I sincerely doubt that this 'Red One' would have stood for such a skewed culture that seems to have existed in the Reds of late.
Of those other Reds who in post whilst this culture was turning sour (the by-standers), then I would like think that they learned a valuable lesson in 'how not to do it' and why it is so easy to say nothing when the alarm bells are going off. We should perhaps have some sympathy with them - mainly because we weren't there and secondly because its a very difficult (and often risky) thing to do to tell 'the Emperor' that his tackle is showing to all and sundry as he struts around the town in his 'fine suit'. The few who remain with the Reds may become better people for it - I hope so because there is a fair chance one of them will end up as Red Leader themselves, if the RAF can afford such a unit going forward.
Many years later, I found myself working for the same ex Red Leader, where again, he led by example and the unit he was now commanding was working hard to rid itself of a less-than-professional reputation (from before he had arrived as the boss). Whilst he was a prickly character at first and uncomfortable to work for (because he demanded so much of his team and didn't suffer fools). But he never asked you to do anything he wasn't prepared to do himself and he was the hardest worker on that unit, as well as being the most honest and self-effacing of characters (pretty rare for any pilot, never mind a FJ one and Red Leader to boot) - the term 'speak softly but carry a big stick' comes to mind. As mutual respect and understanding grew, I found he became one of only 2 leaders I that have had in my whole aviation career for whom I would have walked barefoot over coals. I sincerely doubt that this 'Red One' would have stood for such a skewed culture that seems to have existed in the Reds of late.
Of those other Reds who in post whilst this culture was turning sour (the by-standers), then I would like think that they learned a valuable lesson in 'how not to do it' and why it is so easy to say nothing when the alarm bells are going off. We should perhaps have some sympathy with them - mainly because we weren't there and secondly because its a very difficult (and often risky) thing to do to tell 'the Emperor' that his tackle is showing to all and sundry as he struts around the town in his 'fine suit'. The few who remain with the Reds may become better people for it - I hope so because there is a fair chance one of them will end up as Red Leader themselves, if the RAF can afford such a unit going forward.
The following 4 users liked this post by Flipster130:
I have known many Reds - and served with them.
I have known a few Red Leaders - and served with them.
I was never a Red myself - but I am well aware of the huge enthusiasm that they bring to the UK Internationally, and to the British public at some lesser events.
Can we afford them? Can we not afford them? I do not know - I struggle to work out where my tax money goes at the best of times, so I am not prepared to focus on the Reds.
I do not know exactly what has caused this furore - I can only assume that some folk misbehaved - and that is not acceptable in any regime - even politics - but I also have little faith in the media reporting accurately.
So I would give the Boss of the Reds some leeway, and require him (or her) to tighten up on the important discipline necessary for the team - whether Red or Blue - and let them get on with the difficult task of doing what they do well. Perhaps, even, very well.
I have known a few Red Leaders - and served with them.
I was never a Red myself - but I am well aware of the huge enthusiasm that they bring to the UK Internationally, and to the British public at some lesser events.
Can we afford them? Can we not afford them? I do not know - I struggle to work out where my tax money goes at the best of times, so I am not prepared to focus on the Reds.
I do not know exactly what has caused this furore - I can only assume that some folk misbehaved - and that is not acceptable in any regime - even politics - but I also have little faith in the media reporting accurately.
So I would give the Boss of the Reds some leeway, and require him (or her) to tighten up on the important discipline necessary for the team - whether Red or Blue - and let them get on with the difficult task of doing what they do well. Perhaps, even, very well.
The following 5 users liked this post by ex-fast-jets:
A Lord Flasheart can draw many with him, Or piss people off. End of the day, people whom should have known to be professional were not. Not wearing Red, but also wearing Blue. The leaders wearing Red should be keeping tabs on the blue as well. It was their job to do so. I know sod all about females working in Aviation. Sorry, I have spent 10 years working with Female Captains, FOs, Cabin Crew and the odd Engineer. Work is work. I may raise a voice on a technical issue when others should know better, but never to I try in the working environment to insult or force my will on the actions outside of my remit. You get the sack in civvy street doing so. No ifs or buts.
Beagle, you write that as if you know that that is the case, whereas I’d be willing to bet that you wrote it in hope. It’s time for a proper change from a system that has been in place for much of my RAF career. I feel rather sad that one of those evicted from the team last year (earlier?) was a student at Wyton when I was staff. I suspect that there was something of the toxic culture on his FJ tour before he joined the team, but that’s as much conjecture as your assertion.