applying for RAF
 

Hi there, im 16 and am due to sit my higher exams in 3 weeks time - should be fun :} Anyway i think i should do ok seeing as i rarely put my books down and my past paper marks are quite pleasing. Ive applied for a master degree course in aeronautical engineering at glasgow university and will hopefully join the university air squadron if i start.

I was hoping i could be sponsored by the RAF as my funds are very low and i dream about being a pilot every day.

can anyone tell me how to aquire sponsorship form the RAF? I am a big fan of discovery wings and saw a programme of the students at RAF Cranwell. The course seemed great fun aswell as hard work and everyone seemed as enthusiastic as i am!

anyway if anyone can tell me how to aquire any sponsorship itd be much appreciated.

thanx for taking time to read my message :ok:

harri.

The UAS is an excellent place to start. As I understand it, you will do well to receive a 3 year sponsorship, but may be awarded one later on in your university carreer/jolly.

At Officer and Aircrew Selection (can't remember the new name for it - long time ago for me!), I'd advise a bit of quiet arrogance, and tell them that you're joining to be a pilot, and pilot only. If you put down other brances that you'd accept, the danger is that if you're a borderline case, they might take the easy option of sending you to the RAF Regt (fine fellows, of course) or whatever. It also shows some drive, and an unwillingness to take second best (no offence, navs etc).

Nowadays, you're assessed for your future pilot ability at UAS, and while the RAF will tell you that your degree comes first, your future aircraft type depends on how well you perform in the air at UAS. Don't let this deter you, but be advised, to get the best degree you can (which you MUST do) and to fly as well as you can will require self-discipline and hard work.

Note, above all, that the UAS is a fantastic opportunity, and arguably the best way to join up as aircrew. You will love university life and the UAS.

Get stuck in!

joining RAF
 

Hi there,

I have just finished IOT at Cranwell and was a bursar on the University of London Air Sqn (while studying Aerospace Eng at Queen Mary University, London).

Your doing the right thing by studying hard for your highers (I too went through the Scottish system with Highers and CSYS). At the moment the RAF is difficult to get into as a Pilot because of all sorts of issues with the training system, but do not worry about this and stay focused on achieving your aim!

My top tips are:

- Study hard for all your exams and get the best grades possible (goes without saying really)
- Apply for a University Bursary (liase with your Armed Forces Careers Office)
- Whether you are sponsored or not, join the UAS and enjoy flying the Tutor at Leuchars.

Basically, do your best and see what happens. When it comes to OASC be yourself and make sure you have prepared as much as possible. The more you have looked into current affairs, the RAF itself, aircraft etc the less pressure you will be under in the interview for a start!

Hope all goes well - Best of luck!

Woo Woo

The link below was posted by Grimweasel and is an excellent way to prepare yourself for some of the Speed/Distance/Time problems thrown at you at OASC. The questions are a little out of date but just as effective for you to practice.

http://www.timc.clara.net/raf.htm

If you join Glasgow university you will be joining UGSAS. They fly out of Glasgow International airport, which is a pain in the arse. Not Leuchars

All previous advice spot on. They are still recruiting pilots (I just got in), but not very many. Make sure that you read up on OASC, what you have to do whilst you are there, and what they are looking for in potential officers. I will also repeat what has already been said, just to emphasise these points. Be yourself, that is who you want them to select, and if you want to be a pilot, put only that, and stick to your guns - even if they try and persuade you into putting another branch down.
Good luck, PM me if you need any further questions answering, I was there last December.
TMA.

Harri 1888
First, you will need to brush up on your writing.
If you aspire to a commission in the RAF, you will be required to do proper (Service) writing which does not yet recognise texting or internet lazyness when using the English language.
As an aside, like the present government, we are employing more Scots to run the outfit, particularly pilots, since the have heard every cloud has got a silver lining.
Best of luck in your future:cool:

buoy15,

Might want to check your reply is "squeaky" before attacking other post . . . . . . .;)

Contrary to the above post, I wouldn't worry too much about your level of written English. I do not remember having to take a written exam during selection. I have certainly seen enough examples of piss-poor grammar and spelling from commissioned officers to be certain that it didn't play a major part in their selection.

Do your best and good luck with your efforts to join.

Buoy, I'm sure the above post was banter, and so you won't mind me pointing out that this is how you spell 'laziness'. Also, one of your sentences does not make sense, maybe the 'the' should have been something longer. Let he who is without sin......:rolleyes:

Here here,

There are an awful lot more things to get sorted for selection before you look at English. I do not recall anyone being seriously hampered by lack of skill in that area during selection, IOT or life as a JP. Yes, it will feature later - but don't sweat it now.

MT

I agree. Leave it to the ISS tutors. Red ink was invented for a reason !!

thanks everyone
 

I just want to say thank you to everyone who has taken time to reply - the information is much appreciated ;)

I'm pleased to hear that my english is not frowned upon as you probably can see english isn't one of my best subjects.

I will certainly join the air squadron at glasgow - even if i have to fly out of glasgow :ugh:

I will certainly be myself - I usually am so that shouldn't be a problem

thanks again. harri :ok:

I went through OASC at Cranwell last summer, going for a sixth form scholarship. I didn't quite cut the mustard, obviously messed up part 2. In october I'm off to Bath to study Aeronautical Engineering too; should I apply for a bursary after my first year? Or just wait till I finish?
Another thing that has been playing on my mind is whether or not its a big thing to have screwed up first time round?

Nick

ND

Hard luck with OASC! Very much the same story for me a few years ago. Don't let failure deter you from your goals.

Presumably there is a UAS attacthed to Bath Univeristy, in which case, apply to them in September at the Fresher's Fair. If succesful you will be an unsponsored member of the squadron but you will recieve all the same training for free.

The UAS is a great place to nurture potential and if you reapply after one year at uni/on the UAS I'm sure you'll do better.

Harri,

Totally agree with all the above, including the not worrying too much about written English. Definitely get in there with an application to OASC ASAP, you will be lucky to get a slot to be interviewed for a university bursary for your first year, but if you do, be prepared to get knocked back and take it on the chin. The RAF are recruiting 1.5 pilots per week at the moment, you will be up against final year UAS mates, some with high EFT (elementary flying training) passes and large heads to compete with.

THE SITUATION WILL GET BETTER!!!!

So, if you don't get it first time, get yourself down to the UAS - I would pre-empt the freshers' fair and give them a call in September and book your own interview.

If you get to OASC, I advise the following:

Make a chronological list starting at senior school, year by year, of what you have done with your life. Include all sports, achievements, oppurtunities and even holidays. You will be asked a series of questions starting with "What, if any blah blah blah have you done?" They don't want to hear what year you were in, but the calender year. I wasted lots of time in my interview trying to remember what year I was doing what at school. Also, if you weren't in the ATC/CCF, don't play the "I've always wanted to be an RAF pilot" card as you will be backed into a corner, better to say that you decided as you became more mature in your final year of school.

You also have to project your voice and speak clearly, you will be giving and receiving lots or orders in the "jungle gym" under scrutiny from the board.

As has been mentioned before, don't let them bully you into a second branch choice. As much as anything else, they are testing your determination.

Perhaps most importantly of all, don't be deterred by the to$$ers you are going through with who claim to have all sorts of military experience and manifest their aviation tales in the bar. Mostly, they are bulls**tting to cover up for some other inadequacy, and are in no way more suitable candidates than a total rookie to the game.

In summary, you have to show them that you WANT that commission, tell them why you're worth it and be well read on military and current affairs.

Right, back to the finals revision until I find another distraction!!

Good luck,

GF

:ok:

Edited to evade grammatical criticism from Buoy :}

Hey Harri,
Some great advice here, but, as I understand it, you need to have a certain amount of aptitude for flying. I am fairly well informed that the OASC has a method of testing your ability in this department. Fail it, and you're stacking shelves no matter how good you come across in the interviews, group tests etc.

Nick / Slow

Bristol UAS recruit from Bath uni, flying out of a sleepy hollow known as Colerne, that's actually much nearer to Bath than it is to Bristol itself.

All the best!

I do realise I made a total prick of myself...didn't show that I'm not actually all that stupid...
I have actually been to OASC at Cranwell, but I messed up part two (that was a year ago now)
I do intend on joining the UAS at Bristol....speaking of which, does anyone have any idea whether or not I'd have to redo the apptitude tests, seen as I passed them last summer? I know I have to redo the medical, but the UAS weren't really sure about the apptitude tests?

Thanks
Nick

Nick - If you've taken the tests before then you can either retake them or choose to have your old results carried over, I think. There is a time limit though so you'd need to speak to OASC.

Harri - good luck. Most of the above advice is fairly sound, don't worry too much about the aptitude tests, they test for just that - aptitude - which you've either got or you ain't. Doesn't hurt to brush up on mental aritmetic (speed, distance, time, Peter leaves A at 0800 which is twenty miles from B and Derek leaves C at 0830 which is.....that kind of thing), also IQ tests get you in the puzzle solving frame of mind.

What Buoy 15 meant was attention to detail. If you do get your capitalisation wrong, badly mispuncutate and miss-spell easy words, the message you put across is not illiteracy but carelessness.

To avoid Buoy 15's error, and much as do as I say not what I am doing, craft your replies in a word processor, spell checkem, and then paste them into a message.

I an interview film we were shown, circa 1960s, the candidate had a button down short, which was unusually in the air force. He also had long hair. Neither were negative points. What was negative was the fact his collar was not buttoned down and his hair was not properly combed or brushed - attention to detail.

Many young men wear earings. Some aircrew have holes in their ears. I have not seen any aircrew wear earings (males that is). Conforming to ones peer group and team work is everything, at least early on.

Nick

If you have only done the aptitude tests once before you will have to do them again. Only your highest score will count. Most people do improve the second time they do it and there is no point in missing an opportunity to get an even more competitive score if you can.

Can I also advise anyone applying for pilot it is probably a better idea to postpone Cranwell visits till next April if at all possible - OASC have already assigned over 75% of pilot places for the year due to a mix up in figures last April.

Good luck to you all!

Minstral :O

At the risk of sounding like a crusty old bugger (which I am!) I would like to emphasise that the correct use of English (presumably your native language) is important. Believe the "leave it to later it's not important" merchants at your peril.

While you might get through OASC with flying colours, when you get to IOT you might just get a crotchety flight commander such as me who sets great store on using one's own language correctly.

If the take for aircrew is as tough as it appears to be nowadays then the person who can write English properly is going to cream it over the buffoon who can't.

When I was at IOT (Main and Recourse Squadrons) there was more than one cadet that I gave a hard time to because of their crap writing abilities - and there were 2 who admittedly were having a hard/borderline time with the leadership exercises but their written communications was the deciding factor in me chopping them. Presumably they are now stacking shelves somewhere instead of playing with one of Betty's wonder machines.

I second Allan907, Pontius and others.

OK, so you want to do Aeronautical Engineering, not English Literature.

It makes no odds, in my book. Barnes Wallis was a brilliant aeronautical engineer, but if he hadn't been able to communicate his ideas, no-one would have been able to cut metal and build them - and Mona would have been some Friday night fling (or a satellite airfield near Valley), and not a dam that desperately needed a copious amount of high explosive detonated at precisely the right point to cause a rupture.

BEagle is going to come on here soon and make scathing comments about txt yoof. I wouldn't blame him.

Perhaps you also think that five minutes late is not very late? Start thinking plus/minus 2 seconds if you want to fly - and then, when you're 2 seconds out, resolve to do better next time.

BASICS.

Cancel warning - amber RANT caption off.

Chocked for spilling

Gadget :ok:

Shurely shome mishtake? Mohne has it I think, not Mona:ok:

Storl Tern
 

Perhaps I'm being oversensitive, but I actually have an Oxford degree in German. So, to be particularly pedantic, it's Möhne - or if you prefer, Moehne.

Take the piß all you like.

Noch ein Bier bitte, mein Freund bezahlt.

Arschloch!

Gadget :ok:

Couldn't find the umlaut on my keyboard Cap'n:{

Humble grovelling apologies all round:O

Fishing can be very satisfying sometimes:ok:

It's interesting to see how even the least provocative of threads can degenerate!:E

allan,

What you say is perturbing - how are these guys (with poor written comm) getting through English 'O' level (or whatever it is now)?

I can speak from 'a bottom of the barrel' perspective - it took me several attempts to get my English O level (and then I only just passed). I never experienced any problems with written comm and, like I said in my last post here, I never noticed anyone else having problems either.

What has changed? I haven't ever been a Flt Cdr at Cranners, you are/were - what is required at IOT now for written comm? When I went through (Earth still cooling etc) it was very much a 'how much do you really want to be in the RAF' course and I remember no written comm at all (I am sure there was a bit, but I have probably blotted it out of my memory).

From my perspective (mainly Front Line) written comm was never that much of an issue. For a new pilot, the priority was 'stay visual', know the weapons system and SOPs, be there and cope. I've been away from the Front Line for a long time and from the RAF for some years - is written comm now a big issue there?

All the best,

MT

Harri

Please do not take too much notice of the advice offered here regarding English literacy. It would seem the IOT Flt Cdrs of today are really out to pick up on grammatical errors instead of building on an individual's leadership skills and officer qualities.

Nothing new there then. ;)

Attention to detail is one thing, however, ranting on to a chap like yourself about the level of your English is absurd.

The RAF accepts chaps as officers with a grade 'C' at GCSE for a reason...It's all you need! Service writing will be taught to you at a later date.

So all in all...don't be put off by anyone telling you to brush up on your English, simply concentrate on getting through OASC.

Best of luck.:ok:

TF

MT

You ask me how they’re getting a GCSE English at Grade C? Suspect that the fault may lie with my generation (baby boomers) who, once they had graduated from Teacher Training College, threw out the wisdom of the years and concentrated on ‘expression of thought’ etc rather than a working knowledge of the basics of our native language. Very few of us are complete experts; we all make the odd gaffe – misspellings, incorrect grammar, wrong use of words, typing faster than our thoughts etc. However, a basic expertise with your own language is one of the basics. Perhaps that is why the Armed Forces (and a lot of other organizations) insist on basic numeracy and literacy as the minimum qualifications. The RAF has set the bench mark at Grade C or above at O level standard, however, they have no control on what that actual standard is. Perhaps that is why ISS (or whatever they have nowadays) has to be a hurdle that officers ought to pass. Fortunately most officers do have the basics, but a glance at some of the postings here leads one to the conclusion that a lot do not (See Flyer1997 post on New Streaming Point).

I was a flt cdr at Cranditz from 83 to 86 so my knowledge of current teaching is zilch. However, I am sure that Service Writing still forms some of the syllabus. It is there to ensure that the layout and standardization of such things as memos, loose minutes and routine correspondence become familiar. It also has the secondary purpose of determining the basic standard of English.

One of the faults of the ‘system’ is that credence is given to the philosophy that if you are aircrew you don’t need proficiency in English. What utter b*ll*cks. How about these for entries on an F700:

“Oil tempriture gage fluctating” or “Enjin running ruff”

to quote just 2 examples from memory. Or this from a memo from the OIC Athletics:

“All personal [personnel]to note that the track trails [trials] will now be at 0900 on Saturday. Its [It’s] expected that selections will be made the week following [following] for the Group trails [trials] in September when personal [personnel] will be told of it’s [its] final selections.”

Gripping stuff, especially when it is read by an airman who probably wonders which school that particular officer went to and is probably more educated to boot. Don’t forget that an officer is primarily a leader. That’s why so much time is taken up at IOT with leadership training. A leader is looked up to and if that leader is being rubbished by his subordinates because he can’t convey his thoughts in writing just where does that place the leader? And don't forget that correct use of English is an "officer quality" - to quote TimeFlies

A few posts have postulated that it is not important, that proficiency in English is not needed, that it can be skipped over and sorted out later. Fine. Breed a ‘close enough is good enough’ mentality. But what happens when those thought processes carry over into air operations?

As I said, when I was at Cranditz I chopped 2 aspiring pilots – mainly on their borderline leadership and personal qualities – but the deciding factor was their appalling English which, despite constant correction from me and others, had little effect and they continued making the same basic mistakes. One of them actually had the nerve to give the same excuses to the Board as that put by TimeFlies. Impressed them no end!

With reducing numbers and greater competition for the remaining ejection seats the bar has been set higher. Literacy may well be a deciding factor in judging equal candidates. However, you may be the best flier in the world and get through. I fly with one of the most natural pilots in the world but he is impossible with English - and it embarrasses him! He asks me to write his correspondence!

Harri, you’ve read all the posts (I hope) including the unmitigated rubbish from TimeFlies. It’s now your call. In the words of Dirty Harry, “Are you feeling lucky, punk?”

Rant over
:*

Ok, ive been in the RAF for 4 years now, and there's still no sign of this Service writing course you all talk of! am i missing something ? ok, hands up! im not a pilot im an Engineer, but if i read the comments the above guy mentioned in the 700, though more accurately i assume he means the 707A entry, i would just have a chuckle! as long as i knew what he meant, presumably having been verbally informed at the debrief. i wouldnt think anything less o him/her for it. i have other more pressing issues to worry about!

as a by the by, heres a joke for you!

"How do you tell there's an RAF Pilot in the Bar?"

"Dont worry, he'll come and tell you!"

Defence (Service) Writing
 

OK, I'll rise.....
You will have taken the basic DW module when you went through IOT, and most (but not all) branches also include additional modules as part of their professional training course - usually as part of a General Service Knowledge package.
There was a further DW element within the 3 week JOCC, but this was reduced to a point brief and a letter in about 1998.

However, the course referred to by the other contributors is of course ISS (Individual Staff Studies), which used to be a two module correspondence course but has been cut to one 4 month course (I think it's about 4 months) and a written exam, which must be hand-written rather than word-processed.

Not having reached the exalted ranks of Sqn Ldr, I can't confirm this from personal experience, but I understand that there are additional DW elements within ICSC and ASC.

SBG:ok:

P.S. Having read some of YWW's other posts, I now realise that he's an airframe tech, and clearly the above list applies to the commissioned among us. I'm not sure what is currently taught on IMLC etc.

allan907

You have concurred with my own opinion perfectly in your last post. You mention flying with someone you describe as a natural pilot who has difficulties with his level of english.

How do you know that back in 1983-86 you didn't stop 2 very similar pilots from joining the RAF?

I would like to think the chap you fly with is an asset to the RAF even though he never going to be in the final of Countdown.

The picture I wanted to get across to Harri was that there are many more important things to deal with as a front-line pilot than worrying about the anal side of defence writing.

I agree that as an officer one needs a minimum grasp of the English language, however, it is a shame people like yourself take that minimum to their own personal extremes.

Try not to lose focus on the big picture!

Rant over also. :D

The guy that I refer to is a civilian flyer. Whilst being a natural flyer he also has the brain set that "close enough is good enough". He has problems with English despite going to Public School simply because he thought that he didn't need it and could get away with it. That follows through with his flying. He can handle an aircraft far better than I can but his attitude leads him into situations that I would not feel comfortable with. He's got away with it so far.

Were he to have come before me as a potential officer candidate when I was at Cranwell I would have had no hesitation in telling him that as a potential RAF officer the officer qualities come first and his flying abilities come second. I would have directed him to a career with Britannia, Air2000, Air Atlanta or, in our part of the world, Ansett, Skywest et al.

You have missed the point TF. You are first and foremost an RAF Officer. Basic literacy and numeracy are the bedrock. You, and others on this thread, imply that you can get by without even the basics. Ignore the bedrocks at your peril.

I believe we have differing views on what the "bedrocks" are allan.

I have also never come across anyone in my line of work who carries the attitude of "close enough is good enough". They wouldn't be there if they did.

I feel from reading through your threads you are underestimating people and labelling them based only upon how converse with the English language they are.

Standards in writing do not link directly to standards in flying, weapons operating, air traffic controlling, shelf stacking or many other things for that matter. There is a line between required knowledge/pedantic...I will leave you to decide what side you'd rather be on.;)

TF

TF

I accept that there are different standards of English and those standards may or may not impinge on whether you are a good pilot, blanket stacker, brain surgeon or whatever. However, we are talking about an RAF Officer. Officer first and foremost, pilot, WSO, PEdO, ATC etc secondarily.

You want to be just a pilot? Fine. Take your skills to any one of a number of different flying outfits. You want to be an RAF Officer? Great. Step up to the crease - but have all the basics that that job requires.

After all that, you may decide that reaching a basic standard of English is just too hard. Perhaps we then need to go back to square one. Train as aircrew but don't become an officer. Be NCO aircrew (although before it all got to be very macho and fashionable we did have LAC aircrew). NCO aircrew, by and large, don't get involved in secondary duties and all the other trappings of 'leadership' (Mind you, for a long time now neither have the majority of commissioned aircrew - but that's another thread - and perhaps has given rise to the feeling that English is purely a luxury).

The RAF is NOT a civilian airline. It has responsibilities as a disciplined service. It has minimum standards which you must meet as a start point. Degrade those minimum standards and you haven't got a fighting service that is running at top notch.

Oh, and by the way, while I was at Cranditz I also graduated a heck of a lot of wannabee aircrew whose English wasn't desperately good - but, they had reasonably good leadership and officer qualities. The RAF was desperate for aircrew in those days! A case of never mind the quality, feel the width! Some of these people are probably now bordering on Air Rank if not there already.

Harri,

One of the most important qualities of being a FJ pilot is the ability to find solutions to problems independently, showing resourcefulness and tenacity. There is nothing wrong with seeking advice and, as this thread demonstrates, it will invariably be freely given, but the Service respects individuals who do not need to be spoon fed. Your initial enquiries could have been addressed with Google and a little spadework, providing you with an opportunity to ask more searching questions of the PPRuNe cadre. Just a thought for the future. Good luck though.

I too am "anti-dumbing down" with regard to the RAF and agree with TF and allans' points. Nothing infuriates me more than misuse of your and you're, having been educated at a school where the Biology teacher would give you lines for grammatical errors as well subject specific ones. I have relatives residing in the 'Thames Basin' area and recall being horrified at the level of English employed by the staff of the local school in correspondence sent to the parents, my aforementioned dislike being in abundance.

I do have a question relating to this; I understand that regional accents are encouraged in the RAF (I am yet to meet a PTI who isn’t Scotch). With no offence intended whatsoever, how would an individual with a particularly broad accent, and all the colloquialisms which go with it, fare? I know a perfectly well educated Welshman who uses no end of “incorrect” phrases which ingress upon his writing style that apparently are commonplace in his home town.

Just a thought?

GF

If a candidate is understandable and has the underlying officer qualities (and that's a debate for later) then the candidate is likely to get through OASC. If the "rough" language causes problems at IOT then it may possibly impinge on leadership exercises. Too many "Ds" and you're on your way!

I graduated plenty of Scottish officers and consumed vast quantities of scotch in the process:ok:

As a further aside.......In my present position (Mayor of a Shire about the size of Surrey or South Yorkshire) I am in the process of shortlisting candidates for the CEO job (approx Aus$140,000 pa). Of the 30 applicants my Council has binned 10 because of simple English errors on their applications and CVs, and forgetting to submit information asked for. Close enough might be good enough for them but it HAS made a difference, in this case, in their employability.

As I said earlier Harri, "You feeling lucky?"

To take charge of men and be responsible for their work, welfare and discipline

All of the above is irrelevant. An Officer in the RAF has to be all things to all men*. Having a good command of English is only a small part of the big picture. It's no use if you don't actually communicate very well, or have the other Officer Qualities that OASC look for.

In these times, the RAF can be really, really picky. :(

*and women

Sponsorship
 

Harri

Just wondering how you got on with your search for sponsorship...any joy?

It would be interesting to see how you've got on since your last post.

Hope it's good news!

TF