UAS 's to close
 

Have just heard on the grapevine that due to financial constraints all flying activities on all UAS's are being recommended to cease. Apparently, two "SUPER" flying units would likely be formed- one at Wyton and the other likely to be at Leeming!!! It appears that UAS's would become only ground based clubs--well thats likely to attract the next generation !!
Can only mention my exasperation at a decision like this, particularly since we have just binned EFT!:mad:

I know that they are discussing the future of the UAS's at the moment...and IIRC March is the announcement date of any changes that are going to be made.

2 Super UAS's...that's a bit absurd! Would Wyton and Leeming be able to support ALL the tutors? Chaos is the only word that springs to mind.
All I can say is that it's along way for the Scottish studes to travel!

Knowing the yoof of today, I can't see many of them being ar*sed to travel any great distance to fly - everything has to be laid on a plate for them these days. I watch the outcome of the 'March announcement' with interest...

Indeed - roll on march!

I imagine those that can't be a*sed to travel would drop out or be chopped for lack of attendence!

Any rumours about what happens to the AEFs?

About time somebody reviewed the use and therefore the future of the UAS (and with it no doubt the AEF) system. I have believed for some time now that both are obsolete and should be withdrawn.

The argument that the UAS system is a valuable recruiting tool is specious to say the least; at no point do any of the armed forces need to actively recruit for aircrew. As you all are no doubt consumately aware, there is a seemingly endless queue of budding tyro's all eager for a stab at flying some military hardware. The UAS system does nothing but provide a cheap drinking club to students and a social life outside of the university campus at the expense of the tax payer. In my time I have encountered plenty of UAS Cadets both ex and current, and pretty much to a man they all agreed that the UAS was a damn good laugh but taught them nothing of the proper RAF and had no effect what so ever on their decision to join the Service. In fact most joined because they had to as it was part of their cadetship/Bursary Terms. Those that were not in the pay of Aunty Betty that wished to join, were already mad keen on the RAF and were looking to join eventually anyway.

Likewise the ACO have a no need to have access to expensive to operate aeroplanes to provide a 30 minute AEF to cadets. The VGS system already does this and what with the Grob 109 Vigilent, there is plenty of opportunity for powered flight, albeit in a benign regime. But then who said aero's should be part of an AEF profile? The ACO is a cracking organisationthat provides plenty of activities, flying being but just one element. From personal experience, I am amazed at actually how few cadets want to go flying and it would not be an untruth to say that I have seen occasions where ATC Sqns routinely fail to fill their flying/gliding quota.

The concept of the UAS as Trenchard saw it has long since been diluted to a shadow of it's former ideal and sadly in the context of a shrinking modern RAF and tighter budgets should be wound up forthwith.

I am aware that these views will be looked upon unfavourably by many, but then that's what I believe and I feel that if the RAF wishes to remain competitive then clearly a few sacred cows will have to be slaughtered.

What say you gentlemen?

Anyway, Battle bowler on and ducking below the parapit for cover.

Just another sad example of the impoverished Rental Air Farce of today selling off the family silver.... Except that it can't even afford to own and operate its own plastic lightplanes these days.

And it's 'parapet', by the way.

God help the RAF once airline recruiting picks up and they're forced to compete for pilot applicants!

From the ACO point of view one sad consequence of the loss of AEF would be that cadets would almost never venture onto stations (except for annual camps). Perhaps the rest of you might think that was a good thing... but it is one of the main things that marks RAF cadets out from the Army/Navy cadets - the latter rarely encounter the 'real' forces at all (even watching helicopters at Benson from the safety of the AEF squiffers' room is better than never seeing them at all). We are lucky - we get 8 or so AEF slots per year and 6AEF is exceedingly helpful - and it's a major recruiting tool for us.

Tim
(VR(T), despised minority)

makes you wonder though. If they can't be arsed to travel to Yorkshire from Jockland..... are they going to be arsed to put their lives on the line in Iraq?

DK

The RN very definately does need to recruit more than it is currently getting. The more you get applying, the more you can pick and choose the cream. It was explained to me that, whilst there has been lowering of the pass mark recently, nowadays they have to accept the pass mark, rather than select from the vast pool who are well above the mark as in previous times. You will still get your stars, but you will get some dross too.

A "super-UAS?"...oh that'll be the RAF version of JEFTS then. Oops. silly me; the daft bu**ers have already got shot of that!!

(Round and round went the bl**dy great wheel, etc...)

It is impossible to dispute the accuracy of this comment. And indeed, the same argument could be made that the Red Arrows and similar military precision aerobatic teams perform an unnecessary recruiting mission, and should be abolished.

Fair enough, but there is no evidence that the pool of willing applicants is so small or defective that there is any serious reason to worry about quality.

Scaling back or eliminating active recruiting efforts may mean that a few high-calibre people never apply, but that is certainly much preferable to the consequences of other cost-cutting measures that could be adopted instead. Defence cuts are a reality and have to be managed rather than ignored; to my mind, that means putting the remaining money at the sharp end, above all else.

A big advantage of removing the opportunity to fly from the doorsteps of UAS students is that one will then be able to see who is motivated enough to travel to the flying venue.

During my time I have seen many ex-UAS who drifted into the RAF without the right motivation, stayed for the minimum time and then left. During their time they gave little and cost the earth.

Having spent some time teaching air cadets to glide I could have picked much better aircrew prospects than those UAS wasters.

Its all very well harping on about how we all used to be more motivated, but perhaps that's because there was a lot more motivating aimed at youngsters being done by the military and others, eg airshows (not the tedious safe margarine versions we get today) war films, comic books, plus a far more glamorous image all round. Plus, it simply was a far better deal in the past. In todays paperwork pushing military, is it any surprise that people are not so interestedand have to be coaxed a little more.

soddim

Guess I'm one of those UAS wasters. Would never have thought about joining the RAF had I not strolled over to the UAS recruiting stand at freshers week. Been flying FJ ever since and absolutely loving it.

How many airlines get a chance to look at the candidates for three years, and then pick the best for full time recruitment?

Anyway, I met loads of dead-fit totty through the UAS.

Who said the ATC was used to recruit people into the services? Take the blinkers off and look what it does along with the army, navy, police, scouts etc etc. Kids are not hanging around street corners getting into bother. They are taught a little bit of discipline and self pride. At Cosford where I fly AEF, the kids ARE enthusiastic. I still get a buzz when a flight is over and the kids are delighted. Do not underestimate the value of youth organisations, I flew in a chipmunk in 1976 at Leeming and decided there and then that the RAF was for me!! 7 years as a technician and 17 years as a pilot sees me deciding to give the same opportunities to the kids from similar backgrounds.
The loss of AEF could be another small nail hammered into the coffin of our society if it stops ATC recruiting, thousands more yobbos on the streets..... Great!!:(

I'm with jayteeo on this. The cadets who I am privilidged to share a cockpit with are enthusiastic and very appreciative. Most of them will do anything to get airborne. Can't see the AEFs going, without them the ATC would descend into a youth club and the push from the big wheels is quite the opposite.

I don't believe that anyone is suggesting that current or former UAS students are in any way bad people, or that the UAS system is a complete waste of time and money.

I myself was a sea cadet, and most likely would never have joined the navy except for that experience. And although the great majority of my fellow cadets never signed up, they probably got a lot out of the program, which presumably contributed to their development as productive citizens.

All I meant to say is that so long as there is a shrinking defence budgets, cuts will have to be made. And I would rather take steps like closing down the UAS than eliminating operational squadrons, disbanding regiments, or paying off warships. It's simply a matter of (reluctantly) choosing the least of many possible evils. :(

The Corps is constantly complaining that they never get enough flying, yet as many have pointed out they rarely full their slots. Makes you wonder...
Having been on a VGS for a number of years as a cadet instructor, I was often amazed at the number of adult staff complaining that their cadets don't get enough flying, yet the slots they bought along were as i said were often short one or two bods.
Also, for a while I have been wondering actually how much use an AEF is... the number of cadets I flew who when asked about flying experience "oh I've done 10AEF's" yet the cadets had rarely covered anything other than aeros. Yes there are some AEF pilots who do insist on teaching the standard how to fly, but so many cadets it appear just want to go upside down (why not go to Thorpe park for the weekend....).
VGS's seem to be more useful in teaching cadets to fly and even take the successful ones on further. Also, the CCF sections (vast majoritory) seem to be flying a lot more than the ACO, have met many a 13 year old CCF cadet with 15 AEFs or thereabouts under their belts!

As with venturing onto bases, many VGS's are still on active and in some cases frontline bases, so cadets wouldn't be missing out on that aspect.
I'm all for binning the AEF element, and having more VGS's to do AEF etc. (there are apparently a large number of viking airframes unused at syerston..so why not put them into use and get rid of those dam Van Gelder money eating winches!)

I'm not sure entirely what should be done about the UAS's however...I'm in it for the RAF not the social club.

I have to say that in my day job (as a teacher at a 'leading independent school') the clever boys would never in a million years contemplate joining the forces - they can see which way the future is going, and in any case they can earn far more money doing something safe like law or accountancy. Only the enterprising few go into the Army or RAF (insignificant numbers into the Navy) and very few are officer material. One boy did have the sense to go into the Navy in the ranks when he failed selection as an officer, but most of them wouldn't consider it.

Of course, you could always blame the end of the Cold War - rightly or wrongly, that did make the forces more glamorous.

Flik Roll - it has to be said, there is precious little of a syllabus for AEF. There is no structure, no building on previous lessons, &c. In that respect the gliding syllabus is much, much better. Oh, and of course most of the AEF pilots only do it for the aeros themselves - when I fly with them they are always disappointed when I say I'd rather learn to fly the Tutor properly rather than chuck it around and throw up.


Tim

If we are looking at an overall cost issue, then surely it is a good thing if all EFT pilots are paid - NOTHING!!!

How much does it cost us to have JO's hold for years to undergo EFT. Do it on a UAS for free.

Tmmorris, definately agree about the AEF situation!

One big difference between the AEFs and VGSs that is often completely forgotten is that the AEFs have considerably more funded, full-time support. On a VGS all the staff are complete volunteers and give up many, many hours to do all the admin, h&s, engineering, cleaning, flying, training etc........ On an AEF they have a full-time paid Flt Cdr, 100% engineering and ground support provision and so on... That is not to critiscise the AEFs people in any way, I feel they are a crucial component of the ACO flying ethos, but please don't think that the VGSs can just take on the AEF task and do it as well. Many VGSs are already really struggling for staff due to the commitments required... and I can say that as a current A2 on a Vigilant VGS.

At the end of the day, the money spent on VGSs and AEFs is not big bucks in the grand scheme of things - just look at the average balance sheet for Fast Jet logs support - it makes me so sad to think that we good lose things like UASs and AEFs due to across the board budget salami slicing. It seems to me that 2005 could be a sad year for many aspects of the RAF.

I reckon it could, with some juggling. There would be plenty of ex-AEF pilots who could work on VGS's as full time staff? This would mean the ability to run more week long courses, for example all throughout the summer holidays, rather than struggling to pull together staff/borrow staff from other shcools or an A2* for solo checks even.

Again, I think we will just have to wait until March instead of speculating!

OK – I’ll bite. There is at least one AEF where the OC gives a full and detailed briefing to the cadets before they see the video. When the video is finished, the cadets are individually briefed (well OK – in groups of 3 or 4) by the pilot with whom they will fly. This briefing ascertains what they have done before and, having discovered that, covers what they are about to do in the trip to come, and how it will be achieved.

Quite a few cadets just want to fly around and sight-see, or fly to “see their school”, or learn a bit about navigating and have no interest in going upside down in aerobatics. None of these kids are subjected to anything they do not wish to do. Lots of cadets want to do nothing but aerobatics. All cadets get to have their wish (whether it be sightseeing or navigating or aerobatics) when they have gone some way to mastering the basics of flying the aircraft. They are “taught” (in as much as you can “teach” them in the short and infrequent trips they do) straight and level, climbing and descending, turning, the use and effects of the throttle and the rudder, and trimming the aircraft. The OC invariably talks to the kids afterwards to find out how it went, what they did etc.

The individual briefings and the insistence on the basics to start with pay dividends later, and many (in fact pretty much all who wish to) learn to fly some aerobatics themselves. They won’t win any competitions, but they sure as hell come down with a great feeling about themselves.

The vast majority of the cadets we see are keen as mustard and can’t wait to fly again. We rarely (if ever) have “no shows” and – in fact – most units tend to bring one or two “spares” just in case there is the capacity to fly extras. It is incredibly satisfying, particularly when you take a – quite frankly – almost terrified youngster airborne for the first time and manage to have him/her smiling and chatting and obviously thoroughly enjoying the experience within a few minutes and to see him/her showing their mates, by dextrous use of the well-known “fighter pilots’ hands in the bar”, what they have been doing when they get down.

I’m not sure what the statistics are now, but it used to be that a very large majority of officers and airmen in the RAF were ex-ATC/CCF. You can – of course – argue that the reason they joined the ATC/CCF was because they already had an interest in the RAF and so they would have joined anyway. You COULD argue that yes, but from my experience of the cadets I have spoken to (and that is now a very large number), most of the kids of 13/14/15 when you ask them what they would like to do in the future say “no idea yet” before you fly them. When you ask them why they joined the ATC/CCF, they often say "because my mate is in it". Those same kids 20 minutes later say “I want to be a pilot”. Naturally, in reality a lot of these will not either have the real aptitude to achieve their wish, or attain the requisite educational qualifications. In fact it rapidly becomes quite obvious that some of them will never achieve their ambition to become a pilot as long as they have a hole in their a$$. Nevertheless, an abiding interest in aviation has been instilled in their young minds. I know we are told we are NOT primarily a “recruiting tool” ----- but of COURSE we are, and a very effective one at that!

None of this matters of course if you are merely interested in bean-counting because – as has been said – there will never be a real shortage of people wanting to join the RAF. Even now it has a certain “glamour” appeal. However, it can do no harm to have instilled this keen interest in aviation at a young age as it has – whatever you may say to the contrary – a knock-on effect into their later lives no matter what they go on to do as a career (even if the only effect is that they do not figure in the numbers of low flying complaints the RAF receives). This effect is unquantifiable and so will never have any consideration given to it by the bean-counters in their calculations of cost-effectiveness and what must go to make savings.

Not that I have ever been on a UAS proper, but the same unquantifiable effects must occur in the people who have been members of a UAS, many of whom will go on to be “movers and shakers” in some sphere or another. It never hurts to have friends in high places when you are fighting the civil servants for your budget.

Sorry to “preach” but I feel quite strongly about this.

It will also conveniently get rid of those students on hours intensive degrees (maths, sciences, engineering etc) - having regularly done the two-hour drive from Coventry to Cosford on my one afternoon off per week, I'd say that the current system is bad enough! Weekend flying would solve that problem, but then you have QFIs with nothing to do Monday-Friday, and not enough of them at weekends.
Direct Entry EFT takes 6 months, during which a non-graduate would expect to earn around £10k before tax. The UAS course, to make up for the lack of continuity, has an extra 30 hours in it above JEFTS (or did when I went through). Not sure on hourly cost of the Tutor but by the time you've added pay for the student (if that's still going - OC rates on the days they fly) then the cost may well be similar.

I reckon that the whole idea is to discourage pilot entrants from attending university. So that the RAF can recruit them when they are younger - and thus pay them less.

Flying Scholarships - gone
Flight Cadet system - gone
University Cadetships - gone
Bursaries - rare and worth next to nothing


Without even the relatively mild levels of discipline experienced at a UAS, how many of today's yoof will even give the RAF a first look after University? Very few, if any, I would expect.

Trenchard must be up to several thousand RPM in his grave by now......

But when ba starts sponsored training again - as assuredly it's going to have to - competition between the RAF and the airlines will be direct. And on current showing, the RAF is going to have to find something pretty substantial to offer....

'Tis true that the economic cycle is going to see some pretty motivated recruiting by the airlines going on in three or four years time. I recall in my UAS days in the early/mid 90's we had many a crew room dicsussion about whether we'd each rather have; a BA Cadetship or a GDP Cadetship (magic wand permitting).

It was about two thirds in favour of the civilian offering. We were all aware that our likely stream would not be fast jet. When weighed up against getting into BA at 21 the whole life equation seemed to most of us to favour big new shiny jets full of smartly dressed young women.

Nevertheless the RAF had captured us all, was having a damn good look at us and to be honest if they really wanted any of us we were there for the asking for a full commission at the drop of a hat.

If the UAS system goes. Well, there is a long time between being a keen ATC cadet and a university graduate. If during that time the airlines have been actively targetting the right stuff people then the RAF is going to be a distant teenage memory and there is nothing the Service can do about it.

We all know there will never be a shortage wanting to be fighter pilots.

But in a tightening labour market, with airlines shouting for cadets, with a contracted Military not really fitting with modern work/life aspirations and the dawning reality that you are most likely going to be driving helicopters and transports in the future. Well. Who the hell would sign up for 16 years of that?

WWW

ps I note in today Times:

BRITISH AIRWAYS shrugged off a strengthening oil price to hit a six-month high as a leading stockbroker raised its profit forecasts for the flag carrier by 30 per cent.

Following last month’s passenger numbers, which showed BA’s premium traffic volumes reaching their highest level for nearly three years, UBS is increasingly confident that an expected price war on North Atlantic routes is avoidable.

Further, the broker thinks restrained capacity growth and a recovery in corporate travel budgets could leave current-year revenue forecasts looking too low.

With UBS noting that a 1 per cent rise in revenue forecasts increases profit estimates by 30 per cent, it now expects 19.95p of earnings in 2005 and has raised its target from 300p to 330p. British Airways put on 5½p to 252½p.

Genuine question here: Is the UAS budget not a drop in the ocean compared to the cost of running an operational squadron?

Santiago

I understand that the entire UAS (14 units) annual budget would keep one (large) operational station running for a year, NOT including the cost of running the operational squadrons based there.

Iccarus

Where do you get your info? I can understand Wyton, lots of "free" airspace and no other users of the airfield, but Leeming! I don't think so! There is no spare accommodation and the airfield is v busy with sharp pointy darts. If the rumours are true then Leeming may become SH Central so it is unlikely that a "super UAS" would be based there.

Just to bring everybody else up-to-date:

Cadetships all but gone except for Medics.
Bursaries still available to pretty much all branches and worth, I think, £1K per term (or is that per academic year)
EFT - both for direct entrant, graduate direct entrant and UAS students is 60-ish hours +/- flex. UAS students should try to do 20 hrs per year.
UAS students joining as GDE but have not completed the syllabus will finish the syllabus after IOT with a UAS (which was why the RAF did not need JEFTS. Why pay for something you are already doing elsewhere?!?!)

It is pretty much 60 hours for UAS studes as Roland said, with a little extra given for Es-ex's/currency. I think you are expected to do more hours in your first and second year on a UAS. IIRC 10 rings a bell for the third year.
Bursaries are per term (1kish)

10 hours wouldn't even keep a PPL SEP Class Rating valid in the second 12 month period......

If these rumours are true - and I hope that they are NOT - heads should roll over this.

I think it's aleady started with the amalgamation of the two UASs at Leuchars! The UGSAS operation at GLA, is too "expensive" but no feasible place to relocate them (Why not PIK?). They can't be moved to Leuchars, it's nearly full since the Firebirds arrived :p

Another moneysaving idea, brought to you by the Organised Fraudsters, sorry, Politicians, our elected representatives :E

Unless the powers that be, still requiring to tighten the purse-strings, change the system so that only those signed up for service get flying with the UAS? But I can't see that working, though it's probably the only way the bean counters would get "value for money"! Problems with QFI currency, only 2 students signed up, the other students all ground members...[I]Banter warning[I/] It would turn into a drinking club!!;)

As for the AEF/VGS. IF the UAS/AEF's were to close, I'm sure most VGS would be able to cope with providing AEF; however, some are already at max capacity. The flying offered by the AEF/VGS is, I suppose, different and the operation between each AEF/VGS will have differences, syllabus differences etc. Also, the experience for the cadets being at an AEF/VGS on an active station, seeing other RAF aircraft operating is, I feel, valuable.

I cannot understand why in some cases the AEF/VGS slots are not filled and why, for example, the OC the ATC Sqn, does not offer any unfilled places to other Sqns. As someone posted earlier, flying is what differentiates the ATC from the ACF/SSC. Unfortunately, some adult staff are either only in it for themselves or are not interested in flying :hmm: I think the balance is wrong with regards to ATC and CCF AEF. The CCF seem to get more AEF slots than ATC. Given that CCF tend to go flying mid-week.

Flik Roll I think the old "H&S" caused the MVG winch to become a money eater. There was nowt wrong with the one I drive, although it was a few years back!? As for the unused airframes at SYS- there may be more as a result of the DART report. I can see them on eBay or some other auction shortly... ;)

I can't see it, it'll be a bad day if it happens. Investor in people and all that and I'm sure Jock said the ATC was a core activity for the RAF, surely the UAS must be too?

The usual waiting game and rumour control begins. Ho-hum


:ok:

Mil Pilots who believe the airlines will ever again spend money on cadetships or any other form of ab-initio training had better get their head out of the clouds. We need to cut costs to the bone and we don't need officer material, bus drivers will do. There are loads more recruits in the pipeline than the forecast vacancies, despite the growth in air transport and don't forget much of that growth is in low-cost operations...

Most airline recruits start with a self funded PPL/CPL then learn their trade during years of under-paid bush piloting or air-taxi jobs. Many new airline F/O's accumulate debts of tens of thousands of pounds on their way to the right hand seat of a commercial airliner, yet they count themselves fortunate. There's no end to the stream of hopefuls, so there's no need for us airlines to go soft and start paying for ab-initio training as far as I can see into the future...

tmmmorris...your comments RE naval studes experiencing little of their parent service in the URNU are incorrect. i'd argue in fact that transiting the bay of biscay in a P2000 in a reasonable sea state over the period of a week or two gives a rather more realistic insight into a service than an hour a week in a piston engined aircraft with a service who's exposure to other ranks is relatively limited until senior rank is attained.

the UAS, seemed to work well for nearly all those I started out in the RAF with but their attitude at IOT was generally arrogant, aloof and rather irritating. they openly admitted it was more of a cheap drinking club than anything else.

It might have offered cheaper drinks than outside in my days both as a student and later as a QFI (it also reduced the drink/drive risk), but in those days the UAS was staffed with regular RAF officers who kept the little beggars in check - and behaviour in the Mess was firmly controlled. Not sure if it's the same now with ancient FTRS and other pseudo-civilians filling many of the QFI posts?

Another sound reason for the UASs is that they can provide good instructional experience for inexperienced QFIs - or rather could do if the slots aren't taken by recycled ex-Wg Cdrs.

Introducing streaming assessment was a stupid thing to do at the UASs as it inevitably led to conflict between academic and RAF progress. When I was a student we were invariably told that our degrees came first and flying second; flying was purely there as light relief to maintain our interest whilst we struggled with the delights of our degree courses.

The highlight of the year was Summer Camp at a 'proper' RAF station - we went to Thorney Island, Marham, Newton (hmm) and Abingdon. And St Mawgan when I was a QFI. But that high-value event which bonded the students into a team is also a thing of the past, sacrificied on the bean counters financial altar....

Beagle,
The Summer Camp is a thing of the past more because of the lack of accommodation than cost. Basically, there are almost no Stations left where there is enough space for the studes to stay in the Mess for a month. The last one I was involved in, the groundcrew were not able to be accommodated on camp and we were in a Hotel some miles away at great cost to ourselves. Nothing left over from the rate ones there. We were going to have a Camp last year but the Propellor problem hit at just that time. I think we would have used space cleared by a Squadron being on det. but I'm not sure about that.

Mike W

Dear all,

Just before I start I think I should inform you of my current situation. I am currently a third year on a UAS and have had an amzing time.

We have had a brief recently from Gp Cpt EFT, formerly Gp Cpt OASC regarding the "possiblity" of the UAS having there flying (EFT) removed. Option to consider is introducing an AEF style flying course.

I love reading many posts on this website as there is a lot of bitter feelings. I have seen them further up on this post. I loved the one regarding the fact that the "yooth" of today won´t be bothered to travel to a super UAS. Hahaha how I laughed. Of course we wouldn´t we´re lazy students!!! However, I must stress that the incentive to travel over an hour to the airfield is those green triangles. Without a set course yes your right, we would have no need to travel up early in the morning for met brief.

I agree with someones previous comments about removing those that study hard time consuming degrees. How can they be expected to compete with someone doing Geography?

With respect to the ATC and its removel, not a chance, it is too much of a "good thing". Its 50 million pound budget is a mere drop in the ocean, perhaps we should be looking at other areas to cut back on. I myself was never in the ATC but flying with an AEF nextdoor I can see the benefit it brings to the kids these days.

Yes we do go away on great expeds for nothing, again spending tax payers money. So you ask why have a UAS system, as the RAF has no need to actively recruit officers? It simple, because it gives people the chance to see what the RAF is like, in many areas outside of the flying. Someone in an earlier post said that their UAS cadets make too much noise etc etc in the mess. I do apologise about this but I know in out mess the other squadron members and senior officers will obviously pick on the easy targets. But equally they very much enjoy our company as many of them have a UAS background.

It is the best kept secret at University - no doubt there. Obvously the money could be better appropriated but until that day comes I will enjoy my last few months on my squadron and I hope that the years to come shall bring fun and experience to all those that become part of such a valuable and energetic organisation.

Fighting Fire with Fire.....
 

If, as is inevitable these days, the whole argument is about cost, then surely the UAS system must stay !!

I'm not going to compare made up figures, as some seem bound to do, but lets look at the principles:

The UAS is a filter, and a damned good one at that - FACT
The UASs now train 100% of RAF EFT pilots - FACT
The UASs also chop those deemed 'unsuitable for further training' - FACT
The cost of carrying out this filter elswhere (Linton etc) = ~10X that of UASs - albeit out of someone elses pot! - FACT
The UASs provide valuable QFI experience before returning to the front line - FACT

...Just some points for the pot ;)

The alternative? The aforementioned 2 'Super-UASs'. Presumably these would run on one of two basis:

a. A summer camp-type for all VRs. In which case where does the surge req't of QFIs come from?
b. A full time unit. In which case, will we not have even more holding offrs in the system than now, thus at greater cost, as they've yet to be filtered?

Ignite and run......:E

Uncle G