AAC Manning Crisis
 

Slightly random story online, linked below (excuse the source!).

Army's SOS: We need more Apache pilots like Prince Harry for last mission to Helmand | Mail Online

Much has been discussed on here about RAF aircrew manning levels across the various fleets, but rumour has it things are quite a bit worse within the AAC than the story suggests.

Can anyone put any numbers to the current problems? I hear QHI numbers are a particular issue, as with many other places.

Give them to the RAF or the RN - there's plenty of talent to fly them if the Army can't muster it...:ok:

LJ

The reasons for the manning crisis that the AAC is currently experiencing are much more complex.

Flying pay issues - leading to potential serious debt and perceived lack of loyalty from the Corps
Lack of promotion for SNCO aircrew
Herrick drawdown and a certain amount of operational fatigue
Historically dreadful man management
Changes to pensions
Loss of bridging package
Bouyant job market in the Oil and Gas industry

Most AAC pilots that are leaving are doing so because they can get paid more, work less and be treated better elsewhere. Some of those that are left will leave because they have seen how badly those ahead of them have been treated.

It of course doesn't help then people with genuine concerns about their career, family and pay are told "If you don't like it, leave."

Don't know why they need more pilots. Some days they can only muster 3 serviceable aircraft in the UK based Apache fleet.

Still in the donkey-walloping era.....
 

Well it's a tragedy to hear the AAC sorts are being treated so badly. It is my experience that this should be no surprise as the Army heirachy still appears to be in the donkey-walloping era.
Get out of it and join the RAF at least they will mostly treat you as you would want to be treated.
Aircrew tend to be treasured in the RAF, in the AAC they're another statistic and I'm being generous...:ugh:

Still in the donkey-walloping era.....

Another interpretation might be that the Army are soldiers while the RAF are civilians in uniform! :uhoh:

Dundiggin,

I think you may be a little out of touch with the RAF attitude to aircrew. A couple of years ago the AAC was short of experienced instructors (so not much has changed there) and insisted that the RAF honour an agreement it had made and send them an experienced QHI. The RAF didn't bother to seek volunteers, they simply told their most experienced Chinook QHI (and only A1 on type) that he was posted to Wallop to start in 4 weeks time! It came as a bit of a shock to the stn cdr when he PVRd the next working day! Oh, and he only had 4 years to serve to 55. So much for being treasured!

The Cryptkeeper wrote:Funny old thing - loss of a retention incentive has led to loss of retention...:rolleyes:

Genstabler,

If you are ever fortunate enough to be invited to the Officers' Mess at RAF Odiham you might care to have a look in the "Chinook Room". The walls are covered, and I mean covered, with photos of those who have received awards for their actions in the aircraft. Civilians in uniform? Think again pal.

GOT ONE! Target round. Fire for effect.

Haha Genstabler,

I'm splitting my sides at your joke, it's the first time I've heard that one in 30 years as part of world's premier SH fleet! In the late 80's the Army bid for the Chinook fleet and all us aircrew backed the move....we all wanted the redundancy payments to pay for our licenses. To a man none of us was prepared to join the AAC.....and I'm sure their Ts and Cs were much better than they are now!

My old regiment's terms and conditions were not always conducive to a genteel second career in civvy street!

http://i1367.photobucket.com/albums/...ps3912ca0c.jpg

I think Cryptkeeper has scored a resounding DH on the issues. Although a crab, I've worked closely with Corps over the past few years. The flying pay scandal has rocked morale; the guys simply feel that they've been hung out to dry by senior "leaders". Many have jumped into the buoyant offshore world to beat the rush when the SAR crews that don't get SAR jobs go looking.

IMHO they're also shagged out having been hard wired to "surge" on an enduring basis for the past 8 years - more so (I think) than any other force.

The guys have dug out in Afghan and the endless cycle of PDT - the loyalty they should expect in return is lacking. Is it any surprise they're hacked off and leaving?

QED, as I said before, give the airframes to the RAF or RN - they have a better appreciation of airpower than cannon-fodder infanteers and donkey-walloping chinless cavaliary officers that run the Army. Especially as they down-size, the teeny-weeny airways mob will get more and more squeezed to protect 'core' Army capabilities like boots on the ground and tanks.

LJ

PS. I like the teeny-weeny mob and I'm sure the crabs/fisheads would welcome them to their respectively more techno-phillic Services. Hell, we'd even take the ginger one!

Although Genstabler was on a fishing Recce, he did make a fair point. The Army has soldiers, some of whom fly. That was made very clear to me at Leighton House where I made it clear that I only wanted to fly. Guess who never got selected (OK, not the only reason).

Apart from QFIs, there is, I recall, an expectation that Aviation is deployed pretty well forward, in commensurate living and messing standards. How many Light Blue would welcome that beyond novelty? I can't think of many Dark Blue.

You need to get out more - you might hear it for a second time pal!
:)

One would assume the Army hierarchy to a man are Pongoes in the true sense of the word and simply look at the AAC as an add on to their main force and a damned expensive one at that, no wonder the AAC feel hard done by.

Then one would assume wrongly.
The AAC are a teeth arm and a very important one to the combat team, battle group or formation. One of the advantages of manning many of the pilot posts with officers and SNCOs from other arms and corps on attachment is that there is consequently a width and depth of experience of Army aviation throughout the whole Army.
Those soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, which is a preponderance of them, are very appreciative of the direct and indirect support provided by Hawkeye and do not consider them an expensive add-on.
Bugger! I have risen to my own bait! :{

Wrong target
 

Very quickly this has turned in the a light blue vs brown bun fight, should you not be targeting the real cause of the problem........ The chronic underfunding of the UK armed forces and those who are responsable ?

I hope you don't think that my serious Post was intending to do that. I was trying to make the point that, to a soldier, a Helo is just another weapon for the task. The driver is still a battle ready soldier (unless I've been wound up again). In the same way, a WAFU driver is foremost a sailor and the Cab's just another weapon in the ship. WAFUs are not soldiers. The Air Force, on the other hand are neither soldiers nor sailors and neither should they be. Military training is something for Basic and the odd continuation stuff in service.

The point I was trying to make is that if people wanted to grub about in the mud or rough it in the middle of bumf**nowhere, they'd join the Army. If you want to take your chance in a moderately well appointed steel coffin, one joins the Navy. If you just want to fly without all the other embuggerances, one joins the Air Force. There is nothing wrong with that and, to me, it is eminently sensible.

Unless you change the primary function of the AAC, why would most people of the Blue persuasion want to go anywhere near it? I'm a blunty and interested.