...although the main problem with the RAF Sea King OCU is lack of staff, even more acute than airframe issues.

One potential ray of sunshine amid this mess may be the reopening of the SAR pipeline for ab initios - with SAR-H delayed (if not scrapped) then the mil SAR flts will need to keep going for that little bit longer, and a few SAR slots would ease the pain for some of those stuck in the system after leaving Shawbury. Not that anyone wants to be a SARBoy W**ker these days, of course, but surely any flying is better than none?

Crab,

Although I do not embark on a blaming of senior officers (whether classed as 'A' or 'B') and can not comment on the career aspirations of those operating at PMA, I do agree with you.

I was merely highlighting that those in charge of the manning levers took it in good faith that the histoical underfunding of of Battlefield Helicopters (as independently recorded in the NAO report and discussed at length on this web site, the open press and many a crew room) was finally being rectified at last by the Prime Minister's announcement of a significant uplift in airframes that would also require a significant uplift in trained personnel (including aircrew).

Irrespective of available airframes or QHIs at the OCUs/OCFs, the SH training pipeline was turned fully on in anticipation of these new aircraft. We all know that the AAC did a pretty good job in bringing AH in, but they did not calculate both the instructor/full training requirement and the shear number of aircrew required (failure and voluntary outflow rate) - hence having aircraft sitting in storage waiting crews to fly them.

If those in charge of the training pipeline had not primed it in anticipation of the 22 wokkas (as well as the already planned upgrade conversions) then we would have been repeating the same mistake.

We all took it on faith in December 2009 that the 22 wokkas were both MoD, HM Treasury and higher echelons of HMG sanctioned.

The fact that the Treasury subsequently squeezed this procurement without any reflection on the obvious strategic requirement for lift (financially blind across all of the future NSC scenarios) is not the fault of those controlling the levers for DHFS and subsequent OCUs/OCFs.

I agree with most of what MM4 has said although the perception is that the AH64 storage issue was born of an over ambitious declaration by the AAC regarding how quickly CR Crews could be 'created'. This was during the p*ss*g contest between Crabair v Tiny Weenie as to who was going to operate (read control) AH. Either way, that is now history and the present situation is what it is.

I wonder if UK Govt Plc is not keeping a very close eye on the global standing of nations withdrawing now from Afghanistan with a view to prematurely pulling our own plug. Radical I know, but we are bankrupt and we are leaving capability gaps wide open regarding UK Defence at the detriment of fighting a war that we simply cannot afford. There appears to be no 'blinkers off' judgement in military policy these days.

Back to the thread, what will become of the civvies employed at DHFS for their numbers were raised in response to the perceived need for additional students. If the uniformed staff are returned to Front Line cabs leaving civvies only at DHFS it will be a real bad day. The flip side is the shear ammount of PVR within the SH community at this time from Benson and especially Odiham rear crew. Guys so hacked off that they are not prepared to wait for redundancy. If this trend continues, new blood is essential and so the circle is complete. I was not at the pre-christmas DHFS morale booster but would love to be a fly-on-the-wall for the silence by those that were is deafening.

Yozzer, I was and it was awful

MM4 - you trusted what a politician (especially that one) said?????????? Doh!!!

Crab,

I can assure you that I have/had absolutely nothing to do with any of this and as this is a Rumour Network, only offer my thoughts from currently working the shop floor.

But I can understand why those that did make these decisions were lulled into such a belief by the politicians - even without the most damning NAO report highlighting major lift shortfalls, and also ignoring the harsh lessons learned in Afghan I can understand why those that heard Mr Brown's statement to the House promising to deliver the Rotary Wing Strategy was taken as endorsed policy on which the enabling desks were to act. Even with an impending SDSR I can further understand why Rotary Wing Strategy was taken in good trust (and therefore continued resourcing) as every single scenario that the NSC or DG Strat should or could have reviewed involved a significant amount of helicopters as an essential component.

Admittedly the Rotary Wing Strategy did remain mainly intact (Puma LEP, Merlins etc), but dropping to 15 wokkas obviously has resulted in a significant amount of potential rotary lift lost - but it was only when this lastminute.com announcement resulted in the confirmation that the training pipeline should now be scaled back to the re-aligned figure of 15 wokkas.

I dont agree with all of the above - and perhaps greater assurances and clarification should have been sought from the Treasury before putting the Rotary Wing Strategy into practice, but I do have empathy with those caught between a rock and hard place - damned if they anticpated the aircraft arrival and prime the training pipeline, and damned if they waited for the physical aircraft to arrive on our dispersal and wait for the training pipeline to catch up.

Despite all of this, Yozzer is right - I wasn't at Strawbs and that all important briefing, so I will wait and see what the crew room has to offer tomorrow. It cannot be that good as I agree, the silence is here is an interesting one....

Perhaps nothing to see, so no news and move along.....

It seems that this situation is destined to continue ...and that a great number of RAF aircrew (in training) are going to have to endure a further period of of indecision.

l shall elaborate...

This week, there was a meeting between the Air Officers and Group Capt's (read Stn Cdrs) Re. this very issue. Those PPruner's who have been in the RAF for any length of time will find it no surprise that the 3 Star/2 Star were unable/unwilling to make any decisions with respect to what will happen to students in training - this meeting, which was supposed to determine the future prospects (fate) of those hundreds of Officers/NCO's in trg, concluded with no clear way forward, much to the frustration of many Gp Capts present.

Are you in this situation? A student in training? If you are, it's time to get vocal...call your Desk Officer (It's his job!!!!). Write to the AOC...you are fighting for your career!!!

Is it possible, does anyone believe, that the RAF Hierarchy actually have the intelligence and gumption to tell the truth and be honest. Personally I hope so, but I doubt it very much... too many 2 and 3 stars covering their asses for a chance at the next rank and 'who care what happens to the guys who go and fight for the country' - they should look at their reflections and weep at what they have become. It makes me sick.

The AOC's are looking for a way to get rid of people without giving them cause for legal redress - this is a legal minefield but hey are negotiating it as well as they can I assure you. Please do not let them do this without a personal explanation - call your AOC, write to them/email them - ask what is going on. Ask them personally - and see if they have the courage to answer - I personnaly bet the silence will be deafening...Our AOC's are allowing the RAF to be disected, because they don't care. It is that simple...they don't care....think differently? Good, show me some some proof.
As RAF Officers I believe we must consider ourselves abandoned. We are on our own. The Air Officers have got their promotion umbrellas and they don't care about us, and God forbid they need to make decisions. Don't believe me?...find one, and ask about the meeting on Wed...ask him what they actually decided...I rest my case. I am ashamed to be an officer in the RAF.

Chopabeefer

AOC 1Gp would seem 'to care' shown in this recent outburst RAF chief Greg Bagwell: Spending cuts will mean our air force is little better than Belgium's | Mail Online

AOC 2Gp, only in post for 2 days, would probably punch you and tell you to "f0ck off!" (can't decide in which order!) if you suggested he 'didn't care'.

I can't speak for AOC 22Gp as I don't know him.

So which of the 3 AOC's left are you refering to? I know that at least 2 out of 3 'care' and are good leaders of men.

:confused:

iRaven

Chopa,

I admire you for your passion, even if it may be a little naive. However not all that long ago you were implying that the military lords & masters were doing good work to change the mil for the better...

but now its...

If, as you now say, senior leadership in the RAF is that bad at the moment then maybe looking for solutions outside the box/MOD is the right course of action?

SW

Does anybody have the number for TV Truckmaster? i think I might be needing that!:ugh:

I think a certain Air Rank Officer (Rhymes with Nixon) will step up to the plate and sort out things out when he takes over his new post (Not far from a certain VRP near Salisbury) in March.
He has very recently seen the trg pipeline first hand and is not content with the lack of flying that the students are currently being given and the rediculous amount of students in the system and holds suffered prior to each phase of trg and OCU.
Watch out, watch out, targets will fall when hit!!!!:ouch:

DHFS = AOC 22 Grp
OCF = AOC 1 Grp

With the best will in the world, HQ JHC are a sponsor devoid of any real single service impact. The theory was good, the practice inevitable. The most you will get is a bun fight behind closed doors that nobody will ever hear about. The people with the strings in their hands live in Downing Street not Andover.

The C/S that rhymes with Nixon won't let the insignificant fact that the problem lies in someone elses garden stop him from picking up the ball. And god help any AOC who cry's foul - if he hasn't changed, then he won't give a crap.

I understand that 'he who must be obeyed' at a fast jet training station, somewhere in NW Wales, has instructed all of the FJ students to write to him explaining why they should be retained in the service.

I do hope that this is not true it would, IMHO, mark a new low.

Actually sounds like a good scheme.

Suppose he is required to write up all the pilots and has only limited knowledge of some. It gives them the chance to tell him something he does not know.

I used the same ploy for many annual reports. No matter how much you know someone at work there is even more that you don't know. The latter may be deliberate however when it comes to retention or release your extra curicular activities might make a difference.

I would advise anyone in the aircrew training system who is made redundant in the coming months to consult a decent solicitor rather than just gratefully accept what you are given.

I would be very surprised if, given the half arsed selection methods that may well be employed ("...Bloggs is a better letter writer than myself, so he was retained while I was made redundant, even though I'm a better pilot...."), a good solicitor couldn't get you considerably more in compensation than the standard package currently offered under the various AFRSs. What have you got to lose by at least investigating this option, a one off fee for a consultation?

Everyone knows (just like all the pregnant WRAFs who got 6 figure compensation figures for their dismissal several years ago) that you were destined to make CAS, no matter what your current OJAR says (and you probably haven't had one yet as you are still in training), so your loss of future earnings will in no way be compensated by the paultry compensation given by the MOD.

What have you got to lose by pressing the point?


Edited to say:

PN - If you are referring to the use of "boast sheets" for compling annual reports, they are fairly standard these days. However, like most things they have both good and bad points. On the one hand they can bring to the attention of your reporting officer achievements they were not aware of - mind you, given the limited number of characters available in a report commenting upon all the achievements is not always possible! On the other hand, it can mean that poor reporting officers make even less effort to get to know those within their chain of command, on the basis they know they will have a crib sheet to work to come report time!

Like most things with regard to reports, it all comes down to the calibre of the reporting officer.

Fair point. One FS was happy where he was and said just give me 3s boss. I made him write his own report and guess what - the bugger couldn't do less than 4s and 5s. Thoroughly deserved a warrant IMHO based on his personna and also a brilliant OOA report. Sadly I probably only gave him a first class write-up, if you see what I mean.

Appreciate the gen there sir. How long are we talking here; 6 months, a year, 18 months? Because it seems likely that with all that time on the ground, aircrew will become very rusty!!!

He hasnt even had time to oil his nuts yet let alone worry about rust! They will virtually end up doing the complete MEARW course again, and that is cost effective...NOT.
It is a shambles; those embedded in the system should be allowed to run their course (pardon the pun). The rumours of a line being drawn and the top 50% getting through whilst their lessor assesed peers get chopped is fraught as with the best will in the world, people have an isolated bad day through exam nerves whilst instructors are prone to hyping up their own students marks. Favourtism is human nature, and even the best instructors can succombe to it when such draconian decisions are at stake.

Although anyone with any sense knows that you need to keep the training flow going through the ages, i'm led to believe that there's some nebby law that won't let you force redundancy on folk at one end whilst you're still recruiting others to 'replace' them.