Genstabler,

I can't comment on the first picture, but with regard to the second, wikipedia says:

Between appointments in 2002, Dannatt spent six weeks at the School of Army Aviation at Army Air Corps Middle Wallop, where he was trained as a helicopter pilot in order to fulfil his duties as Colonel Commandant of the Army Air Corps (AAC), to which he was appointed on 1 April 2004.

In 2002 General Dannatt was 52. While not wishing to deride his achievements, I would suggest the above comments, if true of course, imply that he didn't exactly have a deep and extensive "flying background".


I would therefore suggest that his example does not really rebut teeteringheads arguement!

Having a pair of wings does not denote a flying background. Tour after tour in flying appointments until after 30 years you are appointed head of your service probably qualifies.....and there's only one service that does that. No disrespect to the other services, their aviators are fine fellows but their commanders are not as aviation minded......quite rightly, of course they have other priorities.

It's a shame that the AAC can't have a "peer review" into the flying pay overpayments. Repayments might be reduced by about 90%.


BBC News - Maria Miller expenses: Rows 'eating away at credibility'

kintyred

Tour after tour in flying appointments until after 30 years........probably means you know a lot about flying and bugger all about anything else.

Genstabler,

Life is not quite as simple as you would it to be, but I'll try not to use any long words. Flying is only a means to an end. For the military that's about projecting power. Like dominating the high ground (airspace as we call it today), or moving forces to where they need to be. As a military pilot, CAS did the latter for many years. He will have listened to the ground commander's wishes, understood his requirements and probably even suggested a better way of achieving his goals with his aircraft. Ground tactics are not beyond the comprehension of clever people, like pilots. Military aircraft don't fly in hermetically (you'll have to look that one up) sealed bubbles, they are part of the military machine and their operators are pretty good at providing what the "customer" wants. In short, you can rest assured that CAS has a good grasp of more than just swanning about the sky.

I hope I haven't fallen for another of your hilarious jokes!

Wow, kintyred! To provoke such a pompous response, I really must have got deep under your skin!

You are absolutely right of course. The two winged master race, but only if they are in the RAF, are the new Clausewitzes, the undisputed Gods of the art of warfare in every element. They should take over the running of the shambles that are the Army and RN because they, and only they, can truly understand the mysteries of control of the high ground (airspace as you call it) which will deliver victory.

I'm not laughing, honest!

PS. Thank you for not using long words. You are most considerate.

Genstabler,

A chip on both shoulders then!

No 4, as a Capt was a good 2 i/c on a Gazelle Flt in 86, went onto something more Italian and colorful if I remember correctly. Bloody good Polo player.

But air warfare is beyond the comprehension of anyone else, including Navy and Army flyers?

Let us know when that hole you are digging reaches Australia. You can compare egos and chips with the locals. :)

kintyred,

Speaking as a long term member of the light blue, I think you'll find that the 3 gentlemen in dark blue above have a far greater grasp and understanding of the importance of an MPA and what they bring to the party than any CAS who has run the RAF over the last 50 years. Even one tour on an ASW helo would provide that.

I think you'll also find the same of any senior RN officer with an SSN background. Fingers crossed, our latest man might have a better insight from his previous command of the maritime fleet but there is no doubt that the strongest supporters of the need for the UK to regain an MPA capability comes from the RN.

Party Animal,

I don't disagree. I'm sure the current CAS would be very sympathic to the case for MPA, and would argue it convincingly at he highest level. My point is that his experience makes him look at defence from an aviation perspective. Quite understandably the other service chiefs will see matters from a different point of view. I'm sure that RN commanders will appreciate the desirability of MPA as it falls within their specialisation, in the same way that the Head of the Army will appreciate battlefield air support. As you will know the devil is always in the detail and I think that it helps to have an aviation specialist at the top table. This thread is about AAC retention though and while my respect for my Army and RN operators is already on record, the quality of their commanders raises questions in my mind. I have had considerable experience of their decision making through JHC and can assure you that despite having rubbed against flying duties they often fail to grasp matters that lie even marginally outside their experience. With that in mind I can understand how the personnel management of their aircrew has also been found wanting.
Those in glass houses...... You will also find that I often take a dim view of my own commanders!!!

Is that VAdm Alan Richards on the right?

It certainly is. The lineup is RAdm Tom Cunningham CBE (recently ACNS Aircraft & Carriers), Adm Sir George Zambellas KCB DSC (First Sea Lord & Chief of the Naval Staff) and VAdm Alan Richards CB (Chief of Defence Intelligence).