F3 Navs as E-3 Fighter Controllers?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F3 Navs as E-3 Fighter Controllers?
I understand that the E-3D Component is having difficulty filling its slots for Fighter Controllers. Seemingly the supply of capable controllers from the ground environment is in danger of drying up. It appears that soon, with the introduction of Typhoon and the run down of the F3 fleet, we will have a surplus of F3 Navs. These mates clearly understand air defence (at least from a certain angle!) and one supposes that they are reasonably switched on cookies. Would it not make a whole lot of sense to train those that wish to as Fighter Controllers specifically for the E-3D?
No doubt the Fighter Control Branch would have something to say about this but it does seem a logical solution, unless you believe otherwise…
No doubt the Fighter Control Branch would have something to say about this but it does seem a logical solution, unless you believe otherwise…
I would be worried about the Nav's mental health. They are used to working in cramped and claustrophobic conditions. Is there not the danger that a significant proportion may start to experience agoraphobia from the relatively wide open spaces on the E3?
I think this should be studied before hand - alternatively how about some sort of interservice from tthe RAF to the RN's submarine fleet or even to the Army where they can try tank commanding?
I just wantto say thisTequilla stuff is great!!!!
I think this should be studied before hand - alternatively how about some sort of interservice from tthe RAF to the RN's submarine fleet or even to the Army where they can try tank commanding?
I just wantto say thisTequilla stuff is great!!!!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Indian Ocean----Present Day
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are of course assuming that the F3 Navs in question would volunteer for such a post! I have a feeling that most will be gainfully employed for some time to come and the others would prefer the 'you want fries with that?' career move....of course that is just my opinion.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tx, USA
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey, but look at it another way......
They would get more hours flying since, unlike the F'4-1', more than 2 out of every 4 E-3s that try to get airborne remain serviceable!!
Radar.....what i'd give for one of those......!
They would get more hours flying since, unlike the F'4-1', more than 2 out of every 4 E-3s that try to get airborne remain serviceable!!
Radar.....what i'd give for one of those......!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anaprop old chap,
As a fairly experienced E-3D mate I feel relatively well qualified to comment on the E-3D's current manning issues. Firstly, when you say 'Fighter Controllers', I assume that you mean 'Weapons Controllers' (WC's) (as FC breveted individuals also fill surveillance/ESM slots on the E-3D).
Secondly, please don't fall into the outdated concept that the E-3D is an AD platform. Although it was procured for such a role in the Cold War, operationally the E-3D now performs a far wider spectrum of C2 functions (ABCCC, CSAR, Strike coordination etc with forces from all three services). AD is just one very minor part of it's role today. In fact, I would suggest that GR4, SH, AH and Tac C-130 aircrew would have equally if not more relevant experience to current E-3D roles than F3 mates.
You are quite correct however in stating that there are problems in meeting the wpns manning of the E-3D. Traditionally, the majority of E-3D WC's have come from an FC background because there is a legal requirement for E-3D WC's to be qualified to offer full control services (Radar Control, RIS, RAS etc). Whilst there have been a few ex FJ nav's and a couple of AEO WC's, FC breveted individuals (ie commissioned OSB FC and SNCO FC's), still form the majority.
Unfortunately, largely due to the extreme ignorance and questionable political aims of the FC branch leadership, the interests of the Service have not always been best served. Whilst the current Gp Capt ASACS is considerably more forward thinking than his predecessors, there is still more iniertia in the FC branch than is found in the Isle of Wight.
I would be delighted to see a more cosmopolitan mix of backgrounds in the E-3D wpns cadre (and I say that as an FC myself). The mix of aircrew backgrounds (FC's, AEOp, AEO's, GR1, Bucc, F-4, C-130 and Nimrod navs) on the E-3D mission crew generally (when also taking into account surveillance) is probably our biggest strength. Indeed, given recent ops it would be good to get SH experience down the back.
It would make considerable sense in my opinion to employ a diverse spread of WSO/WSOp's as E-3D WC's alongside FC breveted individuals. However, these should come from a similar range of Air Power disciplines that the E-3D gets involved in (mud moving, SH, AT, SF rather than just AD mates).
However, in terms of purely FJ navs, I can't see many guys being available to be released from the GR4/F3 fleets much before 2008. Nevertheless, we do get a number of enquiries from FJ navs considering just such a move for a variety of reasons. For any that do go down E-3D mission crew route, I can assure people that it does offer an extremely interesting and varied employment option with plenty of opportunities for advancement and a long term future. Indeed, the ISTAR platforms (E-3D, Nimrod R1, ASTOR and MRA4) will probably be among the RAF's highest profile assets in coming years.
Regards,
M2
As a fairly experienced E-3D mate I feel relatively well qualified to comment on the E-3D's current manning issues. Firstly, when you say 'Fighter Controllers', I assume that you mean 'Weapons Controllers' (WC's) (as FC breveted individuals also fill surveillance/ESM slots on the E-3D).
Secondly, please don't fall into the outdated concept that the E-3D is an AD platform. Although it was procured for such a role in the Cold War, operationally the E-3D now performs a far wider spectrum of C2 functions (ABCCC, CSAR, Strike coordination etc with forces from all three services). AD is just one very minor part of it's role today. In fact, I would suggest that GR4, SH, AH and Tac C-130 aircrew would have equally if not more relevant experience to current E-3D roles than F3 mates.
You are quite correct however in stating that there are problems in meeting the wpns manning of the E-3D. Traditionally, the majority of E-3D WC's have come from an FC background because there is a legal requirement for E-3D WC's to be qualified to offer full control services (Radar Control, RIS, RAS etc). Whilst there have been a few ex FJ nav's and a couple of AEO WC's, FC breveted individuals (ie commissioned OSB FC and SNCO FC's), still form the majority.
Unfortunately, largely due to the extreme ignorance and questionable political aims of the FC branch leadership, the interests of the Service have not always been best served. Whilst the current Gp Capt ASACS is considerably more forward thinking than his predecessors, there is still more iniertia in the FC branch than is found in the Isle of Wight.
I would be delighted to see a more cosmopolitan mix of backgrounds in the E-3D wpns cadre (and I say that as an FC myself). The mix of aircrew backgrounds (FC's, AEOp, AEO's, GR1, Bucc, F-4, C-130 and Nimrod navs) on the E-3D mission crew generally (when also taking into account surveillance) is probably our biggest strength. Indeed, given recent ops it would be good to get SH experience down the back.
It would make considerable sense in my opinion to employ a diverse spread of WSO/WSOp's as E-3D WC's alongside FC breveted individuals. However, these should come from a similar range of Air Power disciplines that the E-3D gets involved in (mud moving, SH, AT, SF rather than just AD mates).
However, in terms of purely FJ navs, I can't see many guys being available to be released from the GR4/F3 fleets much before 2008. Nevertheless, we do get a number of enquiries from FJ navs considering just such a move for a variety of reasons. For any that do go down E-3D mission crew route, I can assure people that it does offer an extremely interesting and varied employment option with plenty of opportunities for advancement and a long term future. Indeed, the ISTAR platforms (E-3D, Nimrod R1, ASTOR and MRA4) will probably be among the RAF's highest profile assets in coming years.
Regards,
M2
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: A 1/2 World away from Ice Statio Kilo
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M2
"Indeed, the ISTAR platforms (E-3D, Nimrod R1, ASTOR and MRA4) will probably be among the RAF's highest profile assets in coming years."
So would it not make sense to locate all the platforms together combining ops support, training, intel and maintenance services all on one base thus maximising the ISTAR dream and even saving money - or is that too logical/political for the grandes fromages.
ps Not the frozen north
"Indeed, the ISTAR platforms (E-3D, Nimrod R1, ASTOR and MRA4) will probably be among the RAF's highest profile assets in coming years."
So would it not make sense to locate all the platforms together combining ops support, training, intel and maintenance services all on one base thus maximising the ISTAR dream and even saving money - or is that too logical/political for the grandes fromages.
ps Not the frozen north
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From a FCs perspective I would welcome any opportunity for FJ aircrew to come and see what their controllers do for a living. Whether they choose to make that a career is another thing. I'm not suggesting appreciation, perhaps understanding is the best we can hope for.
Can you see FJ aircrew giving up their hard-fought position in the food chain to retrograde into a wide body. Methinks not.
One solution (and yes I am dark blue) would be to increase the numbers of RN FCs going to the E3 world. Lets face it, from 2006, control possibilities will be few and far between with FA2 gathering dust and the GR7 allergy to salt water.
Can you see FJ aircrew giving up their hard-fought position in the food chain to retrograde into a wide body. Methinks not.
One solution (and yes I am dark blue) would be to increase the numbers of RN FCs going to the E3 world. Lets face it, from 2006, control possibilities will be few and far between with FA2 gathering dust and the GR7 allergy to salt water.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: England
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the great strengths of the E-3 fleet is the diversity of experience amongst it's mission crew. It works really well and gives us an important and vital edge. There is no doubt that an F3 Nav would have a huge input to make, but conversly would also have a lot to learn of other air power roles, but that would come very easily and naturally. It is true though that AD is about 5% of the jets present role, mainly cause no-one wants to fight gallantly!!
I'd be really wary as an F3 bod though. To be a weapons controller will mean entering the ground environment and doing some training and consolidating at a CRC. Once they have you they will not want to let go. Before you jump, get a posting notice cast in stone that says Waddington!! If they won't give it tell em to ram it.
The weapons controller manning is absolutely dire and getting worse and no-one is willing to acknowledge the seriousness of the problem. Take for example the ERS controllers. They are required to leave their primary job at another unit to reinforce the fleet. They then retrain, requalify and deploy. The requirement to stay current and the continuous deployments all involves time away from their families and much travelling. They then get totally screwed over flying pay. Some only get it for the operational missions they fly and Innsworth are totally incapable of coming up with a coherent line. So, a guy does 3 months away from the family and gets just 12 days FP for the missions flown. However, even this is then screwed up by PMA and months of nasty letters follows each operational deployment as they try and grab everything back, cause they can't read an auth sheet!! Other ERS guys get FP all the time, but are scared witless they'll be asked for it back, as has happened with a proportion. "Good faith" is no longer a valid argument for "over-issues". Nobody knows where they stand and they are starting to vote with their feet. Morale amongst the WCs is for all intent and purposes non-existent. Its so bad they have even stopped moaning!! To cap it all, you then return to your normal job to be told by your boss he cannot report on you cause you've been away so long and by the way expect a "1" for loyalty!! Result, career screwed for absolutely no thanks and months of hassle, but hey that's nothing new.
We know we're third class citizens (Airmen aircrew justifyingly claim second spot), but if this isn't a massive problem in the making then my a**e doesn't point down. All other major AWACS operators "rate" their guys (you fly, you're aircrew). Ours prefers to totally demoralise theirs, make their core skills appear utterly worthless, deploy them continuously, and then express shock and disbelief that they have the audacity to question policy.
By the way, what the hell is a bonus?????
I'd be really wary as an F3 bod though. To be a weapons controller will mean entering the ground environment and doing some training and consolidating at a CRC. Once they have you they will not want to let go. Before you jump, get a posting notice cast in stone that says Waddington!! If they won't give it tell em to ram it.
The weapons controller manning is absolutely dire and getting worse and no-one is willing to acknowledge the seriousness of the problem. Take for example the ERS controllers. They are required to leave their primary job at another unit to reinforce the fleet. They then retrain, requalify and deploy. The requirement to stay current and the continuous deployments all involves time away from their families and much travelling. They then get totally screwed over flying pay. Some only get it for the operational missions they fly and Innsworth are totally incapable of coming up with a coherent line. So, a guy does 3 months away from the family and gets just 12 days FP for the missions flown. However, even this is then screwed up by PMA and months of nasty letters follows each operational deployment as they try and grab everything back, cause they can't read an auth sheet!! Other ERS guys get FP all the time, but are scared witless they'll be asked for it back, as has happened with a proportion. "Good faith" is no longer a valid argument for "over-issues". Nobody knows where they stand and they are starting to vote with their feet. Morale amongst the WCs is for all intent and purposes non-existent. Its so bad they have even stopped moaning!! To cap it all, you then return to your normal job to be told by your boss he cannot report on you cause you've been away so long and by the way expect a "1" for loyalty!! Result, career screwed for absolutely no thanks and months of hassle, but hey that's nothing new.
We know we're third class citizens (Airmen aircrew justifyingly claim second spot), but if this isn't a massive problem in the making then my a**e doesn't point down. All other major AWACS operators "rate" their guys (you fly, you're aircrew). Ours prefers to totally demoralise theirs, make their core skills appear utterly worthless, deploy them continuously, and then express shock and disbelief that they have the audacity to question policy.
By the way, what the hell is a bonus?????
Just two points to make:
round&round
"All other major AWACS operators "rate" their guys. Ours prefers to totally demoralise theirs......". Nice phrase, but I think you will find if you replace the words "AWACS operators" with "airforces" it is even more accurate!!
left one o'clock
You will have to excuse me, but I am the worst combination, old and ignorant. With reference to being old I remember when Waddington had enough room for 3 or 4 Sqns of Vulcans! With reference to being ignorant, why therefore is there not enough room for 6-7 AWACS (don't know the exact number - ignorant you see), a couple of R1s and 6-7 buisjet sized ASTOR??
round&round
"All other major AWACS operators "rate" their guys. Ours prefers to totally demoralise theirs......". Nice phrase, but I think you will find if you replace the words "AWACS operators" with "airforces" it is even more accurate!!
left one o'clock
You will have to excuse me, but I am the worst combination, old and ignorant. With reference to being old I remember when Waddington had enough room for 3 or 4 Sqns of Vulcans! With reference to being ignorant, why therefore is there not enough room for 6-7 AWACS (don't know the exact number - ignorant you see), a couple of R1s and 6-7 buisjet sized ASTOR??
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Freddoir,
Delighted to have an increase in the number of RN FC's with us. However, experience has shown that RN FC's struggle controlling in the busier and more complex airspace in which we operate. Harsh, but I'm afraid true. That said, tactically, they are pretty good. Additionally, you'd need to spend longer at Waddo to provide decent return of service. At 2 1/2 years, RN guys are ideal for upgrade to FA. Then they get posted!!
Charles,
As Left1OC points out, there isn't the room at Waddo to fit in the MRA4 fleet. I suspect that the revised 3 Gp structure will be the only 'synergy' that the Kipper fleet get with the rest of the ISTAR community. To be honest, I don't think this will be a snag as the MRA4 will be involved in a different form of C2ISR from the Waddo wing. Anyway, the E-3D, R1 and ASTOR will probably be out of service by the time the Mk4 sees the light of day!
R&R,
You are quite correct in pointing out that the current requirement to qualify as a WC in the bunker world puts most if not all GD/NCA guys from even considering the WC (as opposed to surveillance) route. However, given that CRC experience is probably becoming less and less relevant to modern E-3D ops, I personally believe that Waddington will be trg a proportion of it's own WC's within 5 years. Other than a few weeks of Phase 1 foundation at Boulmer, that should then remove the need for experienced aircrew to spend time underground on the East Coast.
Secondly, lets not get too bitter; much of the blame for the current farcical situation that exists with FC 'aircrew' terms of service and fg pay is down to our own branch. In particular, it was our branch that rejected the FC brevet being absorbed into the WSO specialisation.
Biggus,
The reasons that Waddo is hard pressed for space are varied. Firstly, each of the (7) E-3D's is considerably larger than a Vulcan. Indeed, the (eventually 6) ASTOR and (3) R1 are of similar sizes to the dear old V word. Moreover, the logistical footprint of these ac is considerably larger than the Vulcan. The typical E-3D crew is now 18 (over 3 times that of a Vulcan) while that of the R1 is 28! The highly specialised roles of the E-3D, Nimrod R1 and ASTOR require considerable ground support at Waddington. Most significantly, there is simply not the quarters available at Waddo!
Regards,
M2
Delighted to have an increase in the number of RN FC's with us. However, experience has shown that RN FC's struggle controlling in the busier and more complex airspace in which we operate. Harsh, but I'm afraid true. That said, tactically, they are pretty good. Additionally, you'd need to spend longer at Waddo to provide decent return of service. At 2 1/2 years, RN guys are ideal for upgrade to FA. Then they get posted!!
Charles,
As Left1OC points out, there isn't the room at Waddo to fit in the MRA4 fleet. I suspect that the revised 3 Gp structure will be the only 'synergy' that the Kipper fleet get with the rest of the ISTAR community. To be honest, I don't think this will be a snag as the MRA4 will be involved in a different form of C2ISR from the Waddo wing. Anyway, the E-3D, R1 and ASTOR will probably be out of service by the time the Mk4 sees the light of day!
R&R,
You are quite correct in pointing out that the current requirement to qualify as a WC in the bunker world puts most if not all GD/NCA guys from even considering the WC (as opposed to surveillance) route. However, given that CRC experience is probably becoming less and less relevant to modern E-3D ops, I personally believe that Waddington will be trg a proportion of it's own WC's within 5 years. Other than a few weeks of Phase 1 foundation at Boulmer, that should then remove the need for experienced aircrew to spend time underground on the East Coast.
Secondly, lets not get too bitter; much of the blame for the current farcical situation that exists with FC 'aircrew' terms of service and fg pay is down to our own branch. In particular, it was our branch that rejected the FC brevet being absorbed into the WSO specialisation.
Biggus,
The reasons that Waddo is hard pressed for space are varied. Firstly, each of the (7) E-3D's is considerably larger than a Vulcan. Indeed, the (eventually 6) ASTOR and (3) R1 are of similar sizes to the dear old V word. Moreover, the logistical footprint of these ac is considerably larger than the Vulcan. The typical E-3D crew is now 18 (over 3 times that of a Vulcan) while that of the R1 is 28! The highly specialised roles of the E-3D, Nimrod R1 and ASTOR require considerable ground support at Waddington. Most significantly, there is simply not the quarters available at Waddo!
Regards,
M2
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: A 1/2 World away from Ice Statio Kilo
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there not a nice piece of tarmac just up the road available, apart from Dynarod wizzing around for an hour a day and a dead dog, it would be very nice and central - also not jockland.
Go on it makes sooo much sense
Go on it makes sooo much sense
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: England
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MM,
I really think you've fallen into the trap. We all know that certain sections are pushing for direct entrants at all levels in the mission crew. I think it will happen and in a few years we'll have a reputation worse than the US fleet, cause we can't paper over the cracks with lots of dollars. As to doing ab-initio training at waddo, come on. A couple of individuals are supporting this as a way of standing out. Its a classic case of self above Service. They'll leave on promotion and some other poor sucker will pick up a right mess. How can we train kids off the street or with 4 weeks in a bunker when we presently struggle to man the jet at all. More studes = more instructors and at the moment the pots empty.
I really think you've fallen into the trap. We all know that certain sections are pushing for direct entrants at all levels in the mission crew. I think it will happen and in a few years we'll have a reputation worse than the US fleet, cause we can't paper over the cracks with lots of dollars. As to doing ab-initio training at waddo, come on. A couple of individuals are supporting this as a way of standing out. Its a classic case of self above Service. They'll leave on promotion and some other poor sucker will pick up a right mess. How can we train kids off the street or with 4 weeks in a bunker when we presently struggle to man the jet at all. More studes = more instructors and at the moment the pots empty.
Charlie Luncher
Irrespective of all the good operational reasons you come up with, I think you'll find that the last point made by Magic Mushroom is even more applicable to the home of the Dambusters, where the forward looking services sold off the majority of the FQs to Annington in the last couple of years to sell on the civvy market. They even moved us service personnel from one street to the next so that they could renovate the houses to "make them up to an acceptable standard for resale”. I know because I was etc etc.
But that’s another topic which has already been done I think.
Irrespective of all the good operational reasons you come up with, I think you'll find that the last point made by Magic Mushroom is even more applicable to the home of the Dambusters, where the forward looking services sold off the majority of the FQs to Annington in the last couple of years to sell on the civvy market. They even moved us service personnel from one street to the next so that they could renovate the houses to "make them up to an acceptable standard for resale”. I know because I was etc etc.
But that’s another topic which has already been done I think.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ANAPROP
To return to the original suggestion of the thread, I don't think it's really a player. This isn't simply because FJ navs would turn their noses up at a change in role; this has already been disproven by the slow but steady stream who've already made the crossover.
The main snag is that there aren't very many F3 navs left. 4 Sqns and an OCU don't take much filling, but none of the 4 op sqns is anywhere close to full nav manning. Innsworth seem to be on the ball as to the final disposal of navs when the F3 folds. A lot of the younger guys are already earmarked for GR4, and many older, greyer types will be happy to stop flying and either PVR or fly desks until pension time. Therefore, don't expect a stampede competing for your jobs.
To pick up your point about the lack of suitable controllers from the ASACS world I would have to say I agree. The standard of control, other than very competent opening disclaimers on the radar services provided, is way below that required. How about some of you E3D gods returning to the ground and bestowing some of your hard-won wisdom on your brevet-less brethern. It might be a nice rest from all the dets you go on.
Anyone gonna bite????
To return to the original suggestion of the thread, I don't think it's really a player. This isn't simply because FJ navs would turn their noses up at a change in role; this has already been disproven by the slow but steady stream who've already made the crossover.
The main snag is that there aren't very many F3 navs left. 4 Sqns and an OCU don't take much filling, but none of the 4 op sqns is anywhere close to full nav manning. Innsworth seem to be on the ball as to the final disposal of navs when the F3 folds. A lot of the younger guys are already earmarked for GR4, and many older, greyer types will be happy to stop flying and either PVR or fly desks until pension time. Therefore, don't expect a stampede competing for your jobs.
To pick up your point about the lack of suitable controllers from the ASACS world I would have to say I agree. The standard of control, other than very competent opening disclaimers on the radar services provided, is way below that required. How about some of you E3D gods returning to the ground and bestowing some of your hard-won wisdom on your brevet-less brethern. It might be a nice rest from all the dets you go on.
Anyone gonna bite????
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R&R,
I think that you're being a tad pessimistic old chap. The direct entry TD/FA/SC issue was buried a few years back and even the ASACS seem to have given up on it of late. I cannot see it happening as even the brass now realise that the shortages in mission crew lies in the grass roots WC area; it is just not even an issue right now. As for your comments about ab initios, who is it that is placing themselves before the Service? Speak to the Trg Flt guys. The latest bunch of ASACS WCs to go through were so inexperienced that the instructors were essentially doing Phase 2 trg anyway. So why not take them that little bit earlier before they've picked up some of the bad habits and mindset of the bunkers? And you have clearly not heard the latest funded plans for the Component's (and most significantly the Trg Flt's) establishment! There is a whole shed load of dosh that is headed towards ISTAR. For a relatively modest outlay on MSLITE and other CBT and emulators, ab initio WC trg is viable. And who said anything about 'kids off the street'? Clearly, ab initio WC trg would require a restructure of the syllabus, but it is doable and not necessarily something that should be so readily discounted. The powers that be have finally realised that (after struggling from one crisis to another in ODF, OAF and OEF) more funding and resources have got to be ploughed into E-3D manning and trg. Trust me, and watch this space!!
TBW
No.......!
Regards
M2
I think that you're being a tad pessimistic old chap. The direct entry TD/FA/SC issue was buried a few years back and even the ASACS seem to have given up on it of late. I cannot see it happening as even the brass now realise that the shortages in mission crew lies in the grass roots WC area; it is just not even an issue right now. As for your comments about ab initios, who is it that is placing themselves before the Service? Speak to the Trg Flt guys. The latest bunch of ASACS WCs to go through were so inexperienced that the instructors were essentially doing Phase 2 trg anyway. So why not take them that little bit earlier before they've picked up some of the bad habits and mindset of the bunkers? And you have clearly not heard the latest funded plans for the Component's (and most significantly the Trg Flt's) establishment! There is a whole shed load of dosh that is headed towards ISTAR. For a relatively modest outlay on MSLITE and other CBT and emulators, ab initio WC trg is viable. And who said anything about 'kids off the street'? Clearly, ab initio WC trg would require a restructure of the syllabus, but it is doable and not necessarily something that should be so readily discounted. The powers that be have finally realised that (after struggling from one crisis to another in ODF, OAF and OEF) more funding and resources have got to be ploughed into E-3D manning and trg. Trust me, and watch this space!!
TBW
No.......!
Regards
M2
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Here,there,everywhere
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MM
"
Stop blowing your own trumpet will you!! Did you not start your career in a bunker....and now if you were choclate you would eat yourself....give us a break.
If the current 'inexperienced' controllers are that bad why dont you do something about it and volunteer to teach them properly??
No I didn't think so
and I would love to see you 'Gods' even try to teach studes after PH 1...........there not as how they used to be!!
"
"bad habits and mindset of the bunkers"
If the current 'inexperienced' controllers are that bad why dont you do something about it and volunteer to teach them properly??
No I didn't think so
and I would love to see you 'Gods' even try to teach studes after PH 1...........there not as how they used to be!!
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Road to Nowhere
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RADAR SERVICES AS BRIEFED!
TBW
Whilst not wishing to bite on the main thrust of your post, the comment above is worth a response. The standard of control is, I believe, a direct reflection of the fact that a good proportion of the work carried out by the CRCs is undertaken by students undergoing Phase 2 WC Trg, or by newly qualified WCs working to a TPS that is considerably lower than was formerly the case. It has been said many times before that the best way to improve the performance of GCI WCs is to debrief (constructively) with them. Unfortunately, it's often difficult to get hold of a specific WC (see manpower shortages previously on thread), and the crews are often unavailable due to hot debriefs etc. Messages about specific sorties can always be passed via the FA, who SHOULD debrief the WC concerned on points good or bad.
As for the opening disclaimers on radar services, I for one would be delighted if an agreement made on the ground could be considered binding so that there would be no need to repeat all the "ADIS 5000 ... responsibility for terrain clearance ..." stuff at the start of each sortie. However, this is simply not going to happen. The recent case highlighted elsewhere on PPRUNE:
ATC Officer Court Martial
ATC Officer Court Martial 2
has forced additional sortie admin on us all.
On the subject of the shortage of FCs generally, the Surveillance stream is, I believe, about 100% manned. It is the Weapons side that is desperately short. I wonder whether some of the retention bonuses available to the 'real aircrew' might help to ease this situation? I think it could attract officers from other branches/specialisations ... if it still sounds unattractive, the closure of a certain Scottish CRC will soon mean that the FC specialisation will at least guarantee JO WCs postings in England!
The standard of control, other than very competent opening disclaimers on the radar services provided, is way below that required.
As for the opening disclaimers on radar services, I for one would be delighted if an agreement made on the ground could be considered binding so that there would be no need to repeat all the "ADIS 5000 ... responsibility for terrain clearance ..." stuff at the start of each sortie. However, this is simply not going to happen. The recent case highlighted elsewhere on PPRUNE:
ATC Officer Court Martial
ATC Officer Court Martial 2
has forced additional sortie admin on us all.
On the subject of the shortage of FCs generally, the Surveillance stream is, I believe, about 100% manned. It is the Weapons side that is desperately short. I wonder whether some of the retention bonuses available to the 'real aircrew' might help to ease this situation? I think it could attract officers from other branches/specialisations ... if it still sounds unattractive, the closure of a certain Scottish CRC will soon mean that the FC specialisation will at least guarantee JO WCs postings in England!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F&F,
Oh for crying out loud...!!!
At what point have I described myself as a 'god' or ever suggested that I am better than anyone in the CRC's?!!!
Us chappies on the E-3D's are no better than anyone in the bunkers; we just happened to have won the lottery that is an FC posting to flying duties. I know from all too recent experience that there are some top quality guys on the ground, many are way better than some of us with brevets! Unfortunately, it remains FC branch policy that there is to be no selection to stream the guys most suited for aircrew duties (notice that this doesn't necessarily mean the guys who are best on the ground!) to AWACS.
However, what an AWACS tour does inevitably give an individual is a far broader exposure to not just Air Power (ABCCC, TST, ESM/SIGINT/JSTARS coord, CSAR etc), but to joint ops (SF, FSCL coord, SH, UAV's, Redcrown ops etc). Inevitably, the CRC's have been left behind in the past 10 years due to their static nature. This is increasingly evident in the problems experienced by SOME of the studes going through E-3D conversion. It is very clear that the revised WC Trg system and continuing outdated ASACS CRT priorities do nobody any favours. Possibly most frsutrating is that all of the E-3D guys that have returned to the ground have been hugely disappointed that their experience has not been utilised to improve the situation. Indeed, in some cases it has been actively discouraged.
I'm not quite sure what you mean with teaching studes after Ph1 as 'they're not how they used to be'. However, the FC branch still recruits some very sharp individuals. Given a relatively minor increase in Trg funding and resources Waddington could train guys to BQ standard on the jet. This would avoid them learning principles that are not relevant to the AWACS role, and hopefully increase WC output. It would also arguably improve recruiting if kids could see a more direct route to the E-3D. It would not however, stop guys crossing over after tours on the ground. Getting guys on the jet younger would also increase the possiblities of them getting back to the CRC's to pass on their experience.
What I'm trying to say is that no system is perfect. There are faults in the E-3D system and there are most definately faults in the ASACS system. Remember, those of us on the E-3D have seen both sides of the fence. I have a lot of experience in the AWACS world and a little in the ASACS. I have no axe to grind. I'm merely trying to highlight what I feel would be the best way forward for the UK services.
Incidentally, I didn't start my career in a bunker!!!!
Now chill out...life's too short!!!!
Kindest Regards,
M2
PS...AA, you ain't kidding!!! All the best, and get yourself down here ASAP!
Oh for crying out loud...!!!
At what point have I described myself as a 'god' or ever suggested that I am better than anyone in the CRC's?!!!
Us chappies on the E-3D's are no better than anyone in the bunkers; we just happened to have won the lottery that is an FC posting to flying duties. I know from all too recent experience that there are some top quality guys on the ground, many are way better than some of us with brevets! Unfortunately, it remains FC branch policy that there is to be no selection to stream the guys most suited for aircrew duties (notice that this doesn't necessarily mean the guys who are best on the ground!) to AWACS.
However, what an AWACS tour does inevitably give an individual is a far broader exposure to not just Air Power (ABCCC, TST, ESM/SIGINT/JSTARS coord, CSAR etc), but to joint ops (SF, FSCL coord, SH, UAV's, Redcrown ops etc). Inevitably, the CRC's have been left behind in the past 10 years due to their static nature. This is increasingly evident in the problems experienced by SOME of the studes going through E-3D conversion. It is very clear that the revised WC Trg system and continuing outdated ASACS CRT priorities do nobody any favours. Possibly most frsutrating is that all of the E-3D guys that have returned to the ground have been hugely disappointed that their experience has not been utilised to improve the situation. Indeed, in some cases it has been actively discouraged.
I'm not quite sure what you mean with teaching studes after Ph1 as 'they're not how they used to be'. However, the FC branch still recruits some very sharp individuals. Given a relatively minor increase in Trg funding and resources Waddington could train guys to BQ standard on the jet. This would avoid them learning principles that are not relevant to the AWACS role, and hopefully increase WC output. It would also arguably improve recruiting if kids could see a more direct route to the E-3D. It would not however, stop guys crossing over after tours on the ground. Getting guys on the jet younger would also increase the possiblities of them getting back to the CRC's to pass on their experience.
What I'm trying to say is that no system is perfect. There are faults in the E-3D system and there are most definately faults in the ASACS system. Remember, those of us on the E-3D have seen both sides of the fence. I have a lot of experience in the AWACS world and a little in the ASACS. I have no axe to grind. I'm merely trying to highlight what I feel would be the best way forward for the UK services.
Incidentally, I didn't start my career in a bunker!!!!
Now chill out...life's too short!!!!
Kindest Regards,
M2
PS...AA, you ain't kidding!!! All the best, and get yourself down here ASAP!
Last edited by Magic Mushroom; 22nd Feb 2003 at 00:04.