AAC Rotary Training
 

Although I'm sure this article is full of spin it makes interesting reading about the way the AAC is approaching their current and future rotary training, Are the SHF and FAA being left behind fighting each other?

IN FOCUS: British Army fights to influence helicopter training choices

I'm frankly astounded.

The AAC actually train!!:confused:

So, according to the article - 65 get trained at shawbs per year. Throughput at wallop is 40-50 per year. What happens to the rest? Holds? Chopped?

There are self preservation undertones in this article, not least of which is an effort to retain the airfield at Middle Wallop that I am assured is in danger of closing. Unfortunatley there is no mention of the support infrastructure provided to the AAC by the RAF such as Safety Equipment fitters and Ground Engineers and the willy waving goes as far as refuelling in the field AAC v TSW and HHI/LPC requirements. Rumour has it that the AAC want to take on the Helicopter Support role(s) [JATE/JHSU?] in toto. The game is changing and the AAC are taking a lead from the Navy in pursuing positive PR and who can blame them. The 'Joint' of JHC is there in name only and the green suited elements of JHC are doing well at maintaining Army interests. Perhaps the uncertainty of Merlin/Puma II and indeed the Benson station is seen as a chink that the AAC can exploit to their own advantage. SDSR was bound to trigger in-service bickering, even subtle willy waving such as this.

Bloody hell, you get issued your own personal iPad these days!! :eek:

What happened to making up your own "green brain"?!

Well, that's the FAA surplus to requirements then!! :}

Yozzer,

"Unfortunatley there is no mention of the support infrastructure provided to the AAC by the RAF such as Safety Equipment fitters and Ground Engineers"

Just a small and dedicated detachment of Squippers on each AAC base....around 20 in number. Please elucidate on the Ground Engineers?

"There are self preservation undertones in this article, not least of which is an effort to retain the airfield at Middle Wallop that I am assured is in danger of closing"

A bit like every other part of defence, we are all under threat. I find it funny that the "spin" call is being used in an army context. We "brown jobs" long have been astounded at the RAF's ability to spin. Indeed, not 6 months ago two Typhoon pilots were RTU'd from Italy after being caught smashed in a ditch by the rozzers.......and then....."we dont have enough pilots for the jets" The war about Typhoon overstretch was not won and GR4 takes over the mantle.

Maybe we should all trawl RAF news and dig out some **** reporting from there and we could all have a chatter!

Ralph

Perhaps if the Puma fleet had not had such a bad record (documented by AAIB reports) then the spotlight would not be on Puma2!

Ralph,

:=

Ralph,
:ok:

I thought the gazelle was going out of service? With a reduced number of Wildcat and almost certainly a reduction in Apache (can they really expect to retain so many?) the AAC won't have too much to shout about. Will they be bigger than the FAA?

Maybe everyone's just nervous that the AAC seems to be able to run all this training capability under the auspices of a single Group Captain equivalent.

Is that really a Naval Officer on an Army Unit slagging off jointery or have I got the wrong end of the stick; especially when the only tri-service training army helicopter pilots get at DHFS are the Army and Navy elements!

It could be seen as a self hack singing the praises of the busy (read restricted airspace) of SPTA versus the freedom that is offered by LFA9 especially with regard to tactical flexibility rather then adhering to published routes. (....and mountain flying (MFTA) on its (LFA9) doorstep)

Good Museum at Wallop though in fairness.

Clearly Joint Helicopter world does not work - too much time b-tching and moaning. It appears that everyone is fixated on trying to outdo everyone else to such an extent that everyone is wasting resource that we don't have. Time for a single service to take on heli ops and save the tax payer some blxxdy money? I for one don't really care which one it is either (WAFU, Brownjob or Crab).

Did wonder if that was still the case. :D

No. They get issued an Apache on day one of the course, and get told, "Right then. Off you go. Don't bend it". :eek:

Yes. There's a world of difference in training pilots to "fly" a helicopter at Shawbury and then train them how to "use" it according to Service. I'm sure the RAF and RN do the same.

I am sure that the hangars full of stored Gazelle that are not fit for purpose for the civvy market are nevertheless retained 'on inventory'. As always, stats can be made to sell the desired story.
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...pie/shbry1.jpg

Fully accept that an OCU/OCF/AFTS of whatever service is the next stepping stone but the statement seems to suggest undoing the single service cultural aspects of the training prior to wallop rather then the academics of flight. In fact there are merits in training on your future operational type that the UK has never embraced as it invariably also incurs more expensive running costs. The main player on that argument is the path taken by a RN Sea King pilot when compared to an RAF Sea King pilot recruited on the same day. Is the Griffin graduate any better a pilot? I suspect he may well be, as training is rarely wasted, but at a cost. A few years ago a few navy pilots and crewmen were routed via MEARW Trg at DHFS and 'pulled' on grounds of cost.

I was on number 196 Army Pilots course in 1967. The CFI at that time was an RAF Wing Commander. After training we newbies could find ourselves on one of 5 types then in Hairy Arm Corps inventory. Tribalism was not as rife between the services in those days. On 'interesting' tours such Northern Ireland pilots from all three services could find themselves operating from the same location and they invariably got along well. Fish heads and brown jobs particularly so. Crab Air was generally perceived as being hampered by their hide-bound regulations.

Incominggggg!! :eek:

Army taught me never to be more uncomfortable than I need be. So I swopped to RAF!

-Crab Air was generally perceived as being pampered by their hide-bound regulations.-

Bertie,

Same, and couldn't possibly agree more (although I very much enjoyed my loan tour with the AAC - very professional bunch they were/are, too).

Don't reply, don't reply, don't reply Ewe......

Bugger.

These day's it's about 'value for money' to Govt & Civvies.

Truth is:-

- in 1995 AAC Islanders Sgts & Cpls, RAF Islanders Sqn Ldrs & Flt Lt'ss.

- in 2005 AAC Apache's S/Sgts & Sgts, RAF Tornado's Flt Lt's & Flt Lt's

Both Services are professional, committed and passionate about doing 'the job' totally. I served in both AAC & RAF, utterly love 'em both, but Middle Wallop is this - bloody good value for money. Dont tell me you cannot compare Apache & Tornado - Apache is delivering Ordnance on target, just the same as it's whizzy fast jet compadre. Judging by other PPrune threads on the Military - it's what the AAC are doing right in 2011.

Forget emotion, tradition, whatever...... Pongoes cost less than Crabs. Both are needed, but please don't knock the Army Aviators, that's the mistake the Royal Navy made 90 years ago with non-Navy Aviation.

Take's cover.......

ewe