Fraudulent Wg Cdr. Possibly.
It isn’t surprising that those who served, and left, years ago have difficulty in accepting comparisons with today’s RAF that they think paints their time (and therefore their contribution) as in some way inferior to that of today. That was absolutely not what I was attempting to say, so I apologise. I was also not trying to start a debate about mass versus technology or play some top trumps game of pitching yesterday’s capability against that of today.
However, what I do know for certain, because I have lived them both, is that the CULTURE of today is one that far more positive, supportive, inclusive and therefore, more effective in supporting output than yesterday’s. I too remember those signs about ‘Those who do not fly exist to support (but here you were meant to read ‘serve’) those who do’. I’m pretty confident that you will find no such sign anywhere in the RAF of today. To many of a certain vintage, this is an anathema. To me, it’s symbolic of a Service that has a far stronger team ethos as a whole, and therefore is far better at generating the full range of air power required to defeat our enemies. And if you look at the RAF’s operational record of the past, say 15 years, you will see a record of performance that is simply outstanding.
Is today’s RAF perfect? Of course not, not by a long way. But if the only thing you see is newspaper reporting of occasional missteps (white male recruiting or the Reds saga - arguably the one sqn that retained some of the 80s mentality) or simply use the data point that retention is harder than it was 30 years ago then you are not making a realistic comparison. There were plenty of public scandals from the 80s and 90s and I know of quite a few others that were never made public due to the prevalent culture of covering up, so please don’t pretend otherwise. And leave it to MAGA Republicans to claim that woke culture is destroying society.
If you don’t or can’t accept what I say, then fine. Societies, organisations and air forces do not change because their members change their minds, they change because the older generation is replaced by younger individuals who have different views, experiences and desires. I saw the RAF change hugely over 35+ years and I know it will continue to change now I’ve left. Whether I think that change will be good or bad is, to the RAF, utterly irrelevant.
However, what I do know for certain, because I have lived them both, is that the CULTURE of today is one that far more positive, supportive, inclusive and therefore, more effective in supporting output than yesterday’s. I too remember those signs about ‘Those who do not fly exist to support (but here you were meant to read ‘serve’) those who do’. I’m pretty confident that you will find no such sign anywhere in the RAF of today. To many of a certain vintage, this is an anathema. To me, it’s symbolic of a Service that has a far stronger team ethos as a whole, and therefore is far better at generating the full range of air power required to defeat our enemies. And if you look at the RAF’s operational record of the past, say 15 years, you will see a record of performance that is simply outstanding.
Is today’s RAF perfect? Of course not, not by a long way. But if the only thing you see is newspaper reporting of occasional missteps (white male recruiting or the Reds saga - arguably the one sqn that retained some of the 80s mentality) or simply use the data point that retention is harder than it was 30 years ago then you are not making a realistic comparison. There were plenty of public scandals from the 80s and 90s and I know of quite a few others that were never made public due to the prevalent culture of covering up, so please don’t pretend otherwise. And leave it to MAGA Republicans to claim that woke culture is destroying society.
If you don’t or can’t accept what I say, then fine. Societies, organisations and air forces do not change because their members change their minds, they change because the older generation is replaced by younger individuals who have different views, experiences and desires. I saw the RAF change hugely over 35+ years and I know it will continue to change now I’ve left. Whether I think that change will be good or bad is, to the RAF, utterly irrelevant.
The following 3 users liked this post by Red Line Entry:
50 years ago when I won my 'Wings', the RAF had some 78 squadrons operating some 35 different aircraft types. Even then the old timers bemoaned the cutbacks they'd seen in 1957....
There were 7 flying training stations including RAFC Cranwell and some 12 OCUs as well... Plus a considerable number of UAS, AEF, test and development units etc.
Sorry, but although today's aircraft are vastly more capable, I can't really accept that such a small RAF is in any way a 'better' place than it was 50 years ago.
There were 7 flying training stations including RAFC Cranwell and some 12 OCUs as well... Plus a considerable number of UAS, AEF, test and development units etc.
Sorry, but although today's aircraft are vastly more capable, I can't really accept that such a small RAF is in any way a 'better' place than it was 50 years ago.
The following 4 users liked this post by cheekychimp:
I didn't say it's in a better place, I said it's a better place to work in, there is a difference. Operationally we obviously can't compete with the RAF of the 80s, but for individuals it's far better than then. But i don't know why I'm bothering to respond as the 'in my day' crowd aren't interested in the modern RAF as it's just full of PC weakness, in their opinion.
The following 6 users liked this post by Toadstool:
As someone who joined in the 80s and is still in, I can confirm that it’s definitely a better place to work in. Since 2001, never been so busy operationally. No need for Opevals or Tacevals although ACE may see a resurrection of these. Back to thread, I was told from day one, don’t steal. Shame that doesn’t permeate through all ranks.
On topic, a former colleague was CM'd, reduced to the ranks and discharged for "borrowing" from a fund (although they paid it back in) to the tune of several hundreds of pounds. I know what sanction I'm looking for here following the theft of tens of thousands. A quiet word? No way. What else can't they be trusted with?
I'd take integrity over talent any day,- at least I know more about what I'm getting.
The following 4 users liked this post by Jobza Guddun:
I can accept the view that the RAF of today is probably a better organisation within which to work than it was many years ago when bullying and vicitmisation was prevalent.
If that's actually true, then fine.
But, for example, when I see the change of emphasis at UAS level, with much less emphasis on flying training than hitherto, it doesn't surprise me that recruiting is problematic.
Back to thread, fraudulent appropriation of public funds is deserving of little sympathy. If it was suspected, why didn't colleagues give him a gypsy's before it went as far as it did?
Anyone thinking of trying to pull a fast one with public funds should ask themselves "Is it worth risking my pension?".
If that's actually true, then fine.
But, for example, when I see the change of emphasis at UAS level, with much less emphasis on flying training than hitherto, it doesn't surprise me that recruiting is problematic.
Back to thread, fraudulent appropriation of public funds is deserving of little sympathy. If it was suspected, why didn't colleagues give him a gypsy's before it went as far as it did?
Anyone thinking of trying to pull a fast one with public funds should ask themselves "Is it worth risking my pension?".
The following users liked this post:
Plus, of course, it makes ANY future employment problematic..................
Have you heard of Capita? If not, I suggest a quick look through some back issues of Private Eye. They were brought in in 2012 by... guess which party... but haven't met a single target and despite the whole loony idea being designed to save money, it's cost the taxpayer more, with far worse performance than when we did it ourselves. As a result the armed forces are badly undermanned, which means everyone has to dig out a lot more to get the work done, which means people leave because they've had enough.
The following 3 users liked this post by anson harris:
There are two exacerbating factors:
there is no wiggle room in the medical standards capita apply, which means there’s lots of clarification from GPs etc about things that happened when entrants were 5
and
the near complete collapse of the GP system means letters regarding random conditions when people were 5 are at the very bottom of the pile (literally) and can take weeks to deal with.
there is no wiggle room in the medical standards capita apply, which means there’s lots of clarification from GPs etc about things that happened when entrants were 5
and
the near complete collapse of the GP system means letters regarding random conditions when people were 5 are at the very bottom of the pile (literally) and can take weeks to deal with.
The following users liked this post:
