Creamie
 

As an ex techie, with just a couple of hundred hours on gliders, I'm intrigued about the 'Creamie' instructors.


It seems so strange, student one minute, instructor the next, seemingly at odds with the civilian world, where 'Flying hours' seem to rule, taking ages to get to the left hand seat.


I never worked in the flying training world when in the RAF, but I always imagined flying instructors to be 'Grizzled old gits' with many hours of experience, who knew every trick in the book.


In the technical world, it would be utterly impossible to have someone straight out of training, teaching all the various nuances to new recruits & I would assume the same thing would apply to flying.


Later on in my career, I was working in a flying training environment abroad, the instructors all experienced with many flying hours, but not exactly geriatric.


The 'Creamie' thing is not explained very well & I would be grateful for any comments.

As the term implies they were the best performing students from each course. They weren't quite 'students one minute, instructors the next', as they had to complete the QFI course before they were let loose on real trainees. In my experience though as they had generally passed through their own training with relative ease they weren't particularly understanding of those that found it hard. I preferred the ex-truckies and similar who had grafted their way through to their wings and who could actually comprehend that what they were teaching was quite difficult for some and therefore why Bloggs was having trouble doing it.

I agree, Ken. My first instructor on JPs at Linton was a creamie and he clearly knew his stuff. But was regurgitating his CFS training without any real experience of interacting with a student. Don't get me wrong, he taught me well. I think he was also a bit pissed off that he wasn't chasing the Harrier slot he believed he deserved. He was even more pissed off by me beating him to the front line.

Yeah, probably a bitter pill to swallow.

The best instructor I flew with at Linton in 1971-72 was a "creamie"; every time he put his hands on the controls, all the needles pointed to the exact numbers. After a bit, I found I could do it too....last heard of him as Wg Cdr CFI at Linton, some years later. Very impressive chap.

Ken, that rang a bell at nav school. Most of the Meteor drivers, IIRC, were Polish and just loved the job. One young pilot was, to my untrained eye, very competent but did not have the same empathy. It occurs to me he may have been a short service commission pilot, still remember his name - Balls.

QFI at Towers mid 60s - Brilliant in every way, thanks Metters, and RiP


PS. And my first "ton" in a car - his TR on Leadenham stright

Remember my JP5 course at Linton - one of the studes was a chap who had broken his leg going round an assault course and had been recoursed by over a year. This particular chap was a green shield Flt Lt and had already been awarded his wings (they were awarded after the basic 100 hrs JP3 course when he went through) while the rest of us suffered from the recent change to the award of wings after valley. This senior student's instructor was a creamie flying officer who used to get annoyed when the groundcrew became confused and kept checking things with the student rather than the instructor!

OMG 'green shielder', and did he then become a 'creamie'?


The fault with both those systems was by the time these guys eventually got to the front line they were too senior and inexperienced. For promotion to front line SQNLDR, I have always believed an operator should have had 3 tours. Especially in the case of a shielder, he could get promoted after 1 tour...not enough experience for a sqn exec.


BTW, the USAF also used the creamie stream, taking guys from graduation and making them instructors. Don't know of any others who did it, perhaps some 3rd world air forces in Africa?

Never had creamies in the rotary world - which must prove something. (not sure what though!")

Would they not be called Whippies ;)

Hat, coat ... door ...

Creamie
 

Did you ever get Nav creamies?

NDW, not to my knowledge. Tended to have FJ navs at 2 ANS who had less experience at log and chart work and 'real' navs, ex truckie and coastal, at the more cerebral end - night astro etc at 1 ANS.

Later, at ANS, the less experienced pencil merchants taught in basics, the more advance streams, low-level FJ and ME, were taught by FJ navs and experienced ME navs.

My term 'less experienced' was relative as many of us had thousands of hours in more specialist roles.

Except that often they weren't! Certainly in the late 90s, the Golden Balls guys would often go straight through training, because they were clearly single seat material, whereas solid but unremarkable guys were sometimes chosen to be creamies to give them a better chance of a Harrier/Jaguar slot when they subsequently went through Tac Weapons.

Agreed.

Creamie
 

Ah, interesting. Thanks P_N.

The French Air Force used to select ORSA (Officers of the Reserve on Active Service) to become instructors. Those career officers who passed through the Hallowed Gates at Orange would have had to have committed a serious faux pas to become an instructor.

It may have changed by now.

Balls
 

PN,
was he the one who called his daughter Ophelia?

I agree with the general principle being stated here, that creamies, whilst capable pilots themselves, often lack the empathy required to help students who are struggling. Creamies who have whizzed relatively easily through their own flying training cannot really be expected to understand what is required to help a student who is working really hard just to keep up.

Additionally, I happen to believe that a QFI, particularly in the military aviation environment, should have an operational tour or two behind him/her, to add some 'street cred' to the position of being a teacher. For example, it is useful to be able to tell a student that a particular process of the syllabus is important because it will be part of what they do in the "XYZ" operational job that they aspire to. It is also important to remember that military QFIs have a role in the development of their students as military personnel and (usually) as officers, so having time and knowledge of working within the overall military system means they can offer advice about the longer term career. Creamies are not well placed to do that.

In my day (Gawd!) back in the sixties and seventies anyone who became an instructor before he became a proper pilot was known as "scummed off" rather than creamed off. This system had been in operation since WW1 when my instructor on Tiger Moths (Flying Scholarship) only survived the war thanks to being kept back as an instructor on Maurice Farman "Pushers".

The main requirement in selecting instructors should have been not in selecting from the brightest and the best but in selecting from those who had the ability to impart skills and knowledge and above all, had the desire and interest to do so.

The courses at CFS were simply filled by Air Secs branch from any who were available. No checks were made of their psychological aptitude or even their interest in the subject.

Not suprisingly this resulted in many instructors who would have preferred to have been anywhere but instructing... and having to tolerate some young sprog sitting in front of or next to them.

Some did their best, others behaved as demented screaming school girls who did little to improve their students abilities or motivation.

Some of the WW2 pilots remarked how their contacts with the enemy were always far more enjoyable than their contacts with their QFI's had been!

I'm sure that things are much better in today's Air Force and that only those who want to instruct, scummed off or not, get to be a QFI. (!)

As (variously) a civvie teacher, RAF instructor and civil service Lecturer I concur with Lou Scannon's view. It is not necessarily the brightest who have the ability and empathy to instruct - indeed having to struggle oneself gives a valid viewpoint as to how difficult your subject can be. I have seen PhDs fail to be effective teachers.

In the early 80s at Cosford we had new Educators posted in with degrees in biology, chemistry, genetics etc (all numerate subjects, note) who, after a short course, taught basic electronics to the students. It meant a lot of burning the midnight oil for them and picking the brains of those of us who had relevant backgrounds and a lot of help from an excellent set of chiefs. Most did well by their students.

I can identify with that.
Initially, I had been described by a creamy as a 'slow learner'.
Once I got a handle on things, though, the aircraft are probably still usable and I'm still here - and so are the passengers.