BATCO
Do you want the rations or dont you!! So we accept SNCO pilots on exchange with the RAF and you promote (and train) all your door gunners. Sounds like a deal.........So............er........It'll never happen:E
Which is a shame, because it is the way ahead

Note to CAS..........

SNCO aircrew was originated in WWII with the Geneve Convention in mind. However our common Fo/Foagh/Fow/Fough......enemy these days does not much care about western war rules. Ref: Authority of rank, a common contempary perception which does have some credance. The simple fact is that JNCO and below do not hold the authority of a SNCO. I recently convinced the stn hierarchy to allow an SAC (Private) to hold a secondary duty that I knew he would be good at. He constantly called for support to advice uncle Tom Cobbly and all that he was operating on behalf of the stn cdr, as nobody took him seriously.

Look beyond rank and see the experience / Street wise / World wise but unfortunately they do go hand in hand.
You may have an immature, baby faced (with acne) 18 year old virginal kid pineing for his mother, but if he has a Pilot Officer stripe, people will either obey him, or use tact and diplomacy to 'guide' him. No soldier / airman will tell him where to get off. An SAC on board an SH helicopter would be a liability, and not one considered to be accountable for his actions, but one considered to require supervision.

So an NCA Sgt has spent most of his time in training then?

What makes him different from a shiny new zob? (Apart from if you swipe his rank with a bar code reader he'll be worth 5p).

wg13_dummy I think the answer to that one is the more money it will cost and the empires it will destroy because of the 'jointary' required to go down that particular road. 1 person for a joint service role over dozens of single servce personnel all pulling in different directions for the percieved good and benefit of their own service, in the knowledge that they only have 2/3 years before they are posted elsewhere :ugh:

I believe the RAF rearcrew training course is some months in length including time at OCU, where as the AAC Rearcrew course is some weeks in length and although there has been alot of headway recently (and not before time) for the recognition of AAC Rearcrew trade. Mainly to do with pay, having a career structure and not alternating flying on high temp operations with sitting around the vehicle park painting landrovers when back in blightey. There is still a long way to go with getting the recgonition of this trade by a few dinosaurs.

.......in a training environment. :rolleyes:

The best of times as a crewman for me was flying single pilot missions in Belize, the UK and continental Europe - especially on AMF exercises, both North and South. Great days, some aircraft had not been modified yet and the decometers were our primary nav aid. We, as crewmen, felt ‘invincible’, with the HP duly occupied, we were co-pilots/navs/engs/alms all rolled into one. Op Banner was the only environment, at the time, where we flew 2 pilot ops within the mainstream of day-to-day SH flying.

Then something ‘strange’ happened. Society changed rapidly; there was empirical evidence to show that the pilot output standard from Shawbury no longer reflected what had hitherto been the case. We were getting a different calibre of pilot coming through the system. Pilots found that the skills that were being asked of them - as they progressed through the OCU - too demanding.

At around about the same time, the Harding report appeared (the RAF’s attempt to convince our political masters that the Apache would be better housed within the SH Force), this was followed by the Curry report. This report attempted to address the aircrew manning of the SH force, as a result of the comments hitherto made. What has evolved since then is what we have today.

IMHO a different world - demands now placed on our crews and hardware that no one could of imagined during that earlier period. We were still flying profiles to deter the 3rd Shock Army after all.

We have seen many changes, and as I come to the end of my career as a SH crewman, I am confident that those who are stepping forward today are more capable than I was at each stage of their training, but in different ways.

Let them know they have our support; I have always admired the quality of RN crewmen, as I have admired the AACs ‘crewmen’ albeit for different reasons.

There are too many over-generalizations been made on this thread, which is very frustrating for some, I am sure. This medium, quite rightly, prevents its readers getting a full picture of the diverse roles our SH crewmen are being asked to perform.

The RN, RAF and the AAC perform unique functions in the rotary world; let us focus on the positives. We have a long journey ahead of us to achieve a tri-service force, there are those at the top who do not wish it, let us prove them wrong. Maybe MFTS will be the catalyst.

Crikey, Level, I was expecting to hear the Star Wars theme tune playing in the background as I read your post!

As I was expecting to hear the "Dad's Army" theme accompany yours Wg.. ker:rolleyes:

Because if a non-commissioned pilot was ever to take the controls of an RAF aircraft they might do something silly like drop a nuke or something.

Whats that? We don't have nukes anymore? Then why don't we have non-commissioned pilots again, they seemed to work pretty well in the past?

:rolleyes:

WG...ker?

How mature.

Nothing to add to the discussion?

I'm sure the others on this thread will see the banter in between the debate.

At least he/she doesn't spend his whole life on this forum. Perhaps if you spent more time in the real world you would know what the real differences between the jobs were!
When was the last time you saw an AAC Rearcrew/door gunner or whatever their latest title is, pick somebody up form the middle of a minefield whilst on the end of a 150 ft wire cable?? Not saying they couldn't do it, BUT that is just one element of the training they would NEED to do to work on an RAF helicopter as a Crewman.
If the perception is that all you need to do is open or shut a door and tie some stuff to the floor, then there are any number of people at Benson or Odiham who would be happy to show you or anyone else the reality.:)
Incidentally, yes, with the right appropriate training there could be some cross polination as the RN Crewmen/Observers are proving at the moment. However, even they have had to do a crossover course at Shawbury and are finding a big difference to the way the different Services operate.:rolleyes:

I may sound old and synical but... hell I am. In my experience the AAC DOOR GUNNERS will always envy the RAF SH CREWMEN and the SH lads will be scared of any competion from the AAC. A new fairer system must be found to offer the lesser trained the same chance as every other CREWMAN regardless of the colour of beret worn.

Me thinks the J in JHC only works when it suits the individual services!!

:ugh:

Who are you on about, Wizard?

I'm sure if Army Lynx were fitted with winches, the rear chaps would be more than happy to carry out the task.

In Brunei and Belize, Army cabs seem to be fairly happy plucking chaps from the jungle....all be it minus the minefields.

Willy fight; sword stowed.




R21

Totally agree!

RTFQ!!!:ugh:

I did RTFQ. But you asked;


Substitute minefield for jungle.

They do it when the task requires and they have been trained to do it.

In a similar but equally pointless vein, I could ask when does an RAF rearcrewman clean his own weapon?

I think most of us are in agreement that a more joint approach to rear crew training 'could' be helpful for all services.


But as R21 suggests, the AAC envy the training and established trade, the RAF are scared of the security of the present rank structure possibly being eroded and as usual, the Navy go off whistling their own tune as they are happy. :}

<quote>As I was expecting to hear the "Dad's Army" theme accompany yours Wg.. ker</quote>

Oh SFFP - what wit! Fast forward 15 or 20 years in your mind and take a look back.

Again and a wee bit off thread, I'm not sure I agree about the gravitas provided by a 20 year old RAF sergeant before a bunch of battle hardened grunts, but let that one go (I was only 24 when I got my third and looking back 24 years, I'm not sure how much gravitas, if any I had). But correct me if I'm wrong, all NCA pass out as sergeants do they not, and I've yet to see why a loadie on a C130 or a scopie on a Nimrod needs to start his/her career as a SNCO, notwithstanding what you might think SH crewmen need to fulfil their role. However, maybe I'm just bitter ex-groundcrew (and an ex-fairy to boot - ah no, I admitted it and unsolicited too! :uhoh:)

I think RAF NCA always get a bit defensive about the rank issue. Especially when reminded JNCO's in both the other services can do a similar job.

Some would say it devalues the rank allowing such youngsters into the WO and Sgts Mess. Some would also ask what SNCO qualities do they have?

I of course wouldn't because I respect how they've managed to keep their trade how they have.

OK, I never suggested they weren't trained on their own types. However, to get back to the original thread, we were talking about AAC Gunners on RAF aircraft so therefore they would have to be re-trained in Voice Marshalling a large aircraft in a potentially confined area whilst controlling a 'live' hoist in a four crew environment.
Once again, not beyond anyone, but not a simple swap from one Service to another as has been alluded to and that is just one example.
:hmm:
Yes,yes, that old chestnut. I will have to remember that next time I fire and return the GPMG to the Armoury(if they are not on a tea break) before I go to the Mess for a cup of tea Correct :D
On the whole very true, but I don't think the correct word is 'scared' here. Apprehensive maybe, but personally I think the rank thing is well establised and it is more likely for the Army to go up in rank rather than the other way round.
As far as the whole 'authority down the back bit' goes, that is only partially the reason.
Consider this- an RAF aircraft (mainly helicopters but not exclusive) can self deploy without engineer support. Quite often it is the Crewman/Loadie and sometimes FE on fixed wing) who services the aircraft whilst the drivers go off for flight planning etc. It needs a minimum of a Senior NCO to sign off the servicing certificate and checks in the Form 700.
Not sure what the rules are for the AAC or RN.
Finally to clarify, all NCA come out of training as Acting Sergeants.

and some say it brings a bit of life into the place. Visit a Mess with NCA members and one without and tell me which has more going on? :)
You don't have to be old and grumpy to be a member of the Mess. :}
Some of the best and busiest ones I have lived in/been a member of/visited are those with a large membership of mixed age groups and trades. In the RAF generally now, there are not to many Mess dinosaurs left. Most SNCOs on Operational stations where there are NCA have not known any different so just get on with their life. There is always going to be exceptions to the rule on both sides of the equation. Old farts and young gobby whipper snappers!
Now, an Army Mess is a different proposition altogether!! :ouch:

Not without incident; but I guess that one is a stone thrown inside a greenhouse.

The rank issue will also involve recruitment and retention. Something that the RAF are close to losing after the Navy have already lost it. The wheels may not like it in an open forum, but the bottom line is that we are willfully short of manpower. There has to be some carrot to compensate for the inevitable divorce-separation-OOA-realisation that your kids are now adults but when did they grow up?

If the MOD wants the small group of helicopter aviators regardless of trade to continually play Tonys game of world politics, then there has to be something it it for the players. The US have lost 5 helicopters in 3 weeks (RIP) which is hardly an incentive to join SH.

Appreciation (read rank) and salary may address the balance a little. But this is not enough for the many who have voted with their feet. It is ESSENTIAL that motivated people are attracted to the role of helicopter aircrew, lets not undermine that by suggesting we try and do it on the cheap.

A good post, Wizard and has opened it up a bit more.

Apprehensive is probably the better term to use. With the way cost slashing is going in the forces, any 'bright' idea to reduce costs is quite often taken above any actual operational benefit. Bin SNCO's and replace with a lower rank would be seen as a 'massive' saving as opposed to trimming the top of the tree first.

I can see the point re crewman signing 700's etc which in turn releases the front crew to crack on with the job in hand. The front seaters in the AAC (or if a tech is along for the ride; doubtful if it's sharp) service and sign off. Although with our system, a class 1 tech (REME Cpl usually) or those signed up for the signatures can sign off a 700. When we had Cpl pilots, they too could carry out this task. Not beyond the realms to allow a Cpl to do it in a future scenario possibly?

I for one am undecided which way this whole thing should go. We have only very recently acknowledged the trade of rear crewman and are still in the early days of establishing it to its fullest extent.

I am wary about allowing our rear crew to be SNCOs by default and I can see the RAF NCA would be rather unwilling to cede their system too.

A L/Cpl who may be an excellent rear crew member in every respect may not necessarily have the qualities of a SNCO yet. We still have to think about the rank structure when not in the cab. I don’t mean that in the 'Army blinkered' fashion but more his experience, leadership and management skills that we expect all SNCO's to have.

With the forces as a whole being strimmed to the bone, a compromise has been forced upon us meaning we have to share a lot more. We can't rely on the past individual force buffer zones that we used to unfortunately.

I'm sure it won't be too long in the future when some bright spark after an MBE will decide to try out a complete cross pollination of rear crew. It will, as with most efficiency measures we are facing be a kick in the swingers for all concerned.




ratty. An old crusty QHI once taught me; 'if you have f**k all to say, say f**k all'. :oh: