Possibly because (up until recently) the MEP requirement for the RAF was bigger than that of FJ and RW. That would be an awful lot of pilots who would have to go through the comparatively much more expensive FJ course to provide sufficient pilots to keep the ME cockpits full. There are lots of ME pilots who serve a full engagement on ME aircraft, be that to 38/16 or 44 or 55. Allied to that, who would fill the OpsO, FSO or staff desk jockey posts if you posted the highly paid, ex-FJ and RW pilots to ME? I'm afraid it doesn't make financial (or logical) sense.:hmm:

Foghorn, just watch this space.

What will hurt the RAF Op capability isn't just the number of our most experienced guys that will go, but the percentage of those remaining. With fleet sizes being much smaller, each aircrew mate that leaves leads to a much bigger dent in output.

In spite of being on a war footing for almost 12 years, I am constantly surprised by the number of Wg Cdrs, Gp Capts and 1* promoted in the last couple of years who have had incredibly narrow careers - very limited op tours (enough to get the 'tick'), no MB experience, no Joint tours. Without a doubt, breaking out and doing whacky out-of-branch and, worse, out-of-Service tours can be career killers, and in many cases scuppers any chance of becoming Executive Stream, irrespective of the broadening that such tours engender.

Are aircrew filling OpsO posts again? I must say the Flight Ops Officers impressed me (unfavouritely) although I can think of 2 exceptions, except one was an ex-flt eng and the ex-AEOp.

Originally Posted by egdg http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...s/viewpost.gif
"There is a strong substanciated rumour of a Sqn Ldr at a double digit ISTAR Sqn taking his troops aside and telling them, and I quote '....if you cross me I will destroy you'. A room full of Officers and SNCOs and he says that to them!!
That kind of leadership isn't going to help retention I fear."

Observe it from the other perspective, if you will..... An unpopular Sqn Ldr may find the 'chaps' play by the rules a little too much in such cases.... Result = More U/S aircraft...... Who's got more to lose, an aspiring Sqn Ldr, or an aspiring SAC ?

Photoplanet, if that rumour has been substantiated, then that's bullying pure and simple.

Typical of someone with Small Man Syndrome - who needs to be reported to his superiors.

That sort of attitude is totally unacceptable in the 21st century - he's not some Victorian mill owner.

Absolutely and totally unacceptable - and has been for many years. A Service Complaint (née Redress) for Bullying (at least) methinks. And if not - why not?? Lots of witnesses!

Oh dear.

My time machine has crashed again.

Hello to all in 1984.

wets

Photoplanet....post90! Undoubtedly, years ago I had to take a young pilot to one side and point out that if actually wanted to fly that month and not suffer crew-in snag after crew-in snag that he needed to apologise to the young linies who he was extemely curt and rude to the previous week. That way, perhaps they may be able coax his aircraft through a start sucessfully. I couldn't positively prove anything (as I would have acted if I could) but suspected that they were looking harder than usual with a very black/white view on the rules..............

Every Boss has a Boss to answer to.

Every hangar has a 'behind' to it.

The P1 redress system for bullying and harassment is ineffective. In fact 'harassment' is a legal term and any potential cases are handed to CivPol. Though you have to be a person who is encompassed by a very particular list to get off the start line. Gay, disabled, none-caucasian etc.

I have been the person who by virtue of age, rank, and pension security, fought the corner of the shop floor against a 2.5 bully. Arguably I won, but the fight was a bitter one that I would not embark on again, despite my efforts at including the higher command chain in the battle. The bloke was a nasty piece of work and he is now a civvie. Good riddance.

Perhaps someone should leave a note on his desk referring to pprune / mil / retention thread.

Then if he has enough nouse how to work out how to access this thread, he might realise that his entire sqn think he's a w@nker!

Reference:

"....There is a strong substantiated rumour of a Sqn Ldr at a double digit ISTAR Sqn taking his troops aside and telling them, and I quote '....if you cross me I will destroy you'. A room full of Officers and SNCOs and he says that to them!!...."

I have the following observation to make, a point which nobody appears to have raised until now. I had the misfortune to meet several senior officers like the aforementioned Sqn Ldr during my time in the RAF. The only difference between them and him, is that at least he is being honest - and telling the troops to their face - rather than only showing his true colours later. They can't say they don't know where they stand with him!







Not that I'm saying his behaviour is in any way excusable you understand, before anyone has a "go" at me!

Committing the ultimate sin here of trying to stop thread creep...

Going back to the original point of the thread, there have been a few posts on here discussing how a first tourist who is doing his ATPL should just bugger off to the airlines as he clearly doesn't want to be in the RAF. Which would be a fair comment, except there are now Sqn's where not doing your ATPL as a first tourist makes you the exception. And these are people who have no pension to look forward too until they are 68, or whatever the retirement age is when they retire...

A year or thereabouts before we secured the vastly superior military accreditation for civil pilot licences, as compared with the current dumbed-down nonsense thanks to 22Gp, people were studying in crewrooms or at home during non-flying times and leaving in large numbers. I recall one Dining-In Night at Brize at which 8 pilots were dined out for airline jobs....

Then came the 'proper' military accreditiation which had the desired retention result - and of course people still had sensible pension rights at ORD/NRD. We also had rather more varied flying to enjoy. We still had the option of QFI-ing at a UAS, for example - and the creeping cancer of contractorisation had yet to appear on the scene. In addition, there were rather more military aerodromes in the UK to which people could be posted.

Now there is virtually NO military accreditation, the RAF cannot seem to think outside the sandpit, pensions have been savaged, aerodromes have been closed and flying is become both rarer and more groundhog day in nature.

So it's hardly surprising that ATPL studies will dominate crewroom activity and that people will leave as soon as they can....

Speaking of retention, I've just heard from a 3rd source (well, 3rd person who'd heard it independently) that following poor uptake of PAS last year, there's a new FRI being tabled, possibly before the assimilation board sits in January.

Anyone with ears closer to HQ than me heard anything...?

Well, this is a rumour site........

Having been told of Desk Officers using terms such as 'demographic cliff' wrt future manning then it could be a wise move. It might even be a case of shutting the stable door before the horses have all bolted.

An FRI for non-pilots or Navs, now that would be a shocker!:ok:

Can the RAF just elect to go ahead with an FRI?

Doesn't it require AFPRB recommendation and treasury approval? Both of which would surely create a certain amount of inevitable bureaucratic delay.

I believe that ultimately new FRIs have to be approved by the Treasury. You can bet in these austere times they will demand significant evidence to prove the need. Would the large number of PA offers made to JO pilots in January and associated lack of uptake be enough?

The treasury would **** bricks if I saw the size of FRI Required to actually have an impact.

The Treasury have indeed looked for evidence of people leaving before providing the approval. Whilst the single services now have a bit more flex than they did the remaining core of aircrew is so small that requiring people to leave before grabbing the FRI stable door can leave us with significant capability holes that could take years to recover.

Some fleets are already reducing below critical mass (ie not self sustaining) and the FJ training system is not far behind.

What fleets are struggling that much?

Are we going to have a glut of post-HERRICK aircrew as Shadow, Sentinel and Reaper either do or don't get absorbed into core, and the TGRF continues to get cut....?

FRI
 

Bring it on please. As I have said previously, I am sufficiently shallow that a decent wedge of money would keep me in for another few years. It wouldn't even have to be that huge to be honest. The recently deceased 80K (minus tax) for Flt Lts would help me out enough to tempt me. Especially when added to the lump sum due shortly thereafter. However a bigger number would only serve to increase the likelihood of me staying!
BV:O

I think the bigger problem with FRIs now is that it comes out of the money devolved to the Single Service. Previously the sS applied to the Treasury/MoD for extra money, now they have to fund it out of their own pot. So, the question for CAS is, what you are going to sacrifice to afford the FRI? The type of money people have been mooting on here are about equivalent to 2 or 3 Junior Ranks' annual salary (at least). Are you prepared to stand up to The Sun (or Defence Select Committee) and say you're worth that?

Surely the request for an FRI just a few years (is it 3 now?) after kicking out large numbers of baby pilots still in the training system (who hadn't actually failed anything), who would just have started to become productive, will take a lot of explaining to beancounters in the Treasury. :ugh:




Still, I expect someone got promoted out of "managing" the cull at the time!! :=

Alfred
 

The Sun will report whatever they like regardless of the facts. The numbers speak for themselves which is why FRIs can be an effective measure. You keep experienced people around for longer leading to additional manpower and a wealth of knowledge for a comparably small outlay.
BV:8

I know what they should use, but that's not the same as they will use....

Not all aircrew are created equal.

Your E3 driver may not want to convert to RW.

etc etc

My replacement's training cost is well into the millions, and they wouldn't give me that as an FRI; so it's a saving! The training pipeline's often kinked, and even if it's working fine, you don't need an LCR pilot who can't do anything; you need to be able to keep your high level multi-qualified QWI/QFI guys with experience and lots of platforms under their belts.

I'm not sure there are any branches or trades where a new guy straight from training can immediately have the same effect as a guy with 20 years of experience, but in the aircrew world, that gulf is more pronounced. It's really difficult to put a price on the knowledge and experience of a 20 year FJ pilot, but considering it's going to cost you millions to get a replacement to the point where he can safely land a Typhoon or Lightning II, never mind operate it, paying him 6 figures to stay around isn't a bad option.

PN, he may not, but are we that split between streams that we'd need to move lots of people sideways? Or could our E3 guy go fly Sentinel or Voyager instead? Could our Reaper people go back to their old fleets, bearing in mind we have very few straight-through Reaper pilots?

I remember being told we have too many people for now to 2014, but too few for 2015-2020.

Reaper pilots...good one!;)

Orca, the Reaper force is staffed by dozens and dozens of experienced pilots from other fleets... if we were to downsize that fleet, shouldn't we send them back there or re-use their experience somehow?

With a few honourable exceptions, most Reaper pilots are there for a very good reason!

(retires to a safe distance) :E

5F5B, I only mentioned E3, the OP also mentioned Sentinel and Reaper.

Besides lots of 'aircrew' at Waddo but few aviators.

And flying the E-3 isn't exactly rocket science. Apart from the engineer, at least they had a job to do. The pilots, and nav especially, were grossly under-utilised.

From my understanding, 5F6B may well be onto something. At a Manning brief early this year, a lot was hanging on (a) Sentinel and Shadow being taken into core funding and (b) whether the VC10/TriStar/Herc K combo went out of service on time. Seeing as (a) hasn't happened yet and (b) is proceeding apace, one may surmise that there may be few to no openings in ME for current FJ or RW folks. Given that the RAF is soon to lose two of the four main RW fleets, and one of two FJ fleets is drawing down, those on high may well assume that shuffling around those who are left will suffice. Of course I'm being simplistic, but then so are our Lords and Masters!

FRI? I'm not holding my breath...

First Officer Military/Airbus at Virgin Atlantic Airways in Redhill, United Kingdom - Job | LinkedIn

Any takers?

Anyone with the option to take that Virgin offer would be wise to consider it IMO.

OAP

Check out this months Air Forces
monthly. CAS quoted at a conference saying shadow taken into core, sentinel due to retire 2015 unless funded from another source, Reaper not confirmed but inferred to be taken into core.
This is balanced against the Tristar (maybe) going out on time.
It's a bit of a toughie for manning I'd say.

Yep, Shadow will stay, as will Reaper but Sentinel remains in the balance.

In a way the above is a bit of a red herring as one of the problems we have is with OCU output. There are quite a few fleets with rather poor fleet availability outside of aircraft directly committed to ops. This leaves us with gaps on the frontline and aircrew waiting on or struggling to get through an OCU. In addition, some OCUs are struggling to grow or retain their instructor cadre and the frontline is not well placed to give-up its experienced personnel to instructional roles.

As a result we are unable to replace the current loss rate. We need aircrew to stay where they are for a bit whilst the post-SDSR crisis calms down - hence the growing call for an FRI. In truth, we are below critical mass on a number of fleets and we are running out of ideas on how to fix the problem with what we have left.