Hmmmm....
 

For what it's worth, from my perspective of pilot streaming boards in circa 2000, it was all about what seats were available with little regard for ability and NO regard for personal preference.

My major strengths were formation and IF while my weakness was low-level nav. On streaming from EFT I asked for fast-jet, then multis and rotary a distant third. I was surprised to find myself at Shawbury a few months later! (With the last rotary navs in 2001 in response to an earlier query).

On role disposal I asked for Puma, then the last Wessex (I really wanted to experience NI), then Merlin, then Chinook (it just looked weird and unsafe), then Sea King a distant fifth. I was, again, surprised to find myself at Odiham a few months later (pattern forming here...)

On posting I didn't really care by that point. The posting ceremony was a bit tame though. You chug a pint and at the bottom was a coloured sticker: black for 7 Sqn, red for 18 and green for 27. I saw a green in mine which meant I was going to be a 'bunster'...but that got cancelled just before I left the OCF due to low-level nav bufoonery! (See para 2!)

Of interest the most fun role disposal I ever witnessed was at Valley while I was doing some pre-wings SAR training: the FJ students were tied to a back wall with a bungee while trying to reach the far wall where pictures of a GR1/F3/GR7/Jag/Hawk/Tucano (memory fails if there was a Canberra too) were pasted. The first one to grab a random picture took it to the QFI who looked at his list and handed the guy a pint of lager if it was the wrong guess (down it and try again sunshine) or a glass of champagne if correct!

I never saw a multis role disposal, but I just assumed it involved pies and ketchup-filled doughnuts...

I had the experience of an interview with a GD Wing Commander in c.1977 approaching several of us "Chopped" pilots in Ground Branches , who wondered,having looked at our flying training records, that we might consider reapplying as pilots .....

The word "loyalty" came up.

No Comment.

Interesting FoI
 

A little broader in scope, but with some relevant snippets, see the following link to a recent FoI response [page 2 section 3 in particular on % of applicants from commencement of EFT to commencement of OCU]:
https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...crew_Stats.pdf

So, if you end up at a UAS instructing on the tutor, what would your background be leading up to that?

Either discipline, I'd imagine? After all, the Tutor is where it all began and it has been that way for a while now.

I know of at least one ADP who flew F-4's and F3s on the front line that's now a Tutor QFI......

As instructors we had (posted to UAS whilst within service term) Wessex, Canberra, Nimrod, Herc, Tornado/Jag bloke for a short period too.

...and then (returning to RAF in a training role after finishing service term - the "old boys") - Lightning, Harrier, Tornado/Jag.

I remember being given a talk in early 82 on UWAS by a Squadron Leader with a splendid moustache, who had come down from the TTTE @ Cottesmore to give all us bright eyed youngsters a first hand account of the new beast.

When explaining he had previously been the Boss of a UAS and went from Bulldogs on to the Tornado, with a refresher on the Hunter in between, it elicited a smirk and titter amongst the eager young studes.

He unfortunately didn't seem to see the funny side and looked at us rather dead pan and serious.

The next day with us nursing hangovers, the whole station came to a stop whilst the said Tornado was exercised around the airfield. Bit smokey if IIRC.

I'm surprised more comment hasn't been made on this FOI response. A quick read through the document makes it look highly likely that once you start on the path to officer aircrew, you will finish it. Chop rates look very low indeed.

97.8% pass IOT
87% (average across the 3 streams) pass to OCU

On the other hand, it does show how few even start the journey. Less that half the applicants walking through the door get invited to OASC.
What it doesn't tell us, and therefore doesn't really help the person making the request, is the OASC percentage pass rate. Does anybody have this final piece to the jigsaw?

Sky, I have asked the question.

Let us make some assumptions including the FOI figures.

5300 present to AFCO
1780 are passed to OASC - 33%
Pilot recruitment at about 125 pa - 600
97.875% pass out ie 582
Assume 45 per year into FJ OCUs - 180
78% then pass through to the FJ OCU - 140

On these figures only one in 38 get from application to AFCO to a FJ OCU.

What I have no feel for is the disposal of the 22% that fail to reach a FJ OCU; whether they are rebranched or reboarded to ME/RW.

PS

From a subjective view, about 2.5% would wash out of nav school for reasons unassociated with officer qualities and aircrew aptitude, things like medical and personal reasons among them. Medical issues are probably as significant at IOT with some voluntarily withdrawing from training.

No actual figures for OASC pass rates but:

"the high pass rate (esp for fg trg) is due to the exceptional job the occ pyschs do in making the aptitude tests robust and relevant. The Gp Capt (the post is now Wg cdr) used to spend 80% of his time with the psychs, esp . . . introduced ab initio for typhoon and . . . making plans for ab initio UAV Pilot selection"

Also:

"The medical process is also hugely robust and instantly weeds out any doubt and in my opinion is the best of the 3 services."

So basically, while suitable to go to OASC, OASC assessment of pilot/aircrew potential is very robust hence the high success rates into IOT and beyond.

My figure of 40-45 will not be far off the mark considering the capability of the two FJ OCU to accept ab initio students with numbers of previous FJ aircrew re-roling from the other types (F3, Harrier, Jaguar).

To summarise then:

The two main stumbling blocks are, 1) getting invited to attend OASC, and 2) passing OASC.

Pass OASC and the rest is about a 90% certainty.

Sky, in a nutshell, yes. The further in to the system you get the more the money that has been invested in you. Chopping a pilot on a final handling check is most expensive.

The other crucial figure is the percentage that get through the OCU to combat ready. Failure at this stage is not unheard of but is fairly low. Loss of wings, ie not being re-rolled is perhaps even rarer.

More:

The number of pilots recruited used to be 125 and is believed to be about the same now. The categorisations now are likely to be more towards ME than FJ as there are only 2 FJ training schemes.

As for NCA they, they will almost certainly be part of those presenting at OASC and not being considered for a commission/pilot. The major consideration here being commissioning potential and not aircrew aptitude.

The FOI request does not address NCA and I have no feel for numbers from external or in-house recruitment.

Pontious:ok:

Thank you Pontious :ok:

Do you know the total number of pilots, (across the 3 streams), who finish pilot training each year?

Sky, no. My source was not near enough to the output end. In fact the number of people routinely aware of that answer would be few. The FJ Sub-Committee would only have one or two members that served on the ME and RW committee(s).

An FOI request would elicit the answer.

In the worst case scenario; if a pilot was deemed unsuitable for all flying routes & with the withdrawal of WSO, what options would said candidate have in regards to a flying career?
Would commissioned WSOp be an option?

At which point the WSOp would become a WSO while his mates took the P.

Loadmasters as was, ALM, had commissioned Loadmasters. I met a wg cdr at AFSOUTH ('buff said) and an absolutely brilliant one, a sqn ldr, Air Transport Ops, at Ascension.

I believe such advancement continues.