There is a syllabus to look at, but - shock horror - it hasn't been sent to everyone who is carping from (some distance beyond) the sidelines.

The relative paucity of mil A2s is nothing new - no reason to raise that as a big concern. The uncertainty for the civ aircrew (and engineers) is very unfortunate, but also inevitable as Ascent wait for HMG to change the goalposts yet again (or not - the Lady hasn't yet decided if she's for turning Pumas or Wildcats into razor blades).

Plan B - one trusts that Ascent's money men weren't borrowed from Soteria...no doubt they have got the financial side nicely sewn up...

Shawbury was once a very nice place but, as a 135/145 engineer, I wouldn't touch their traditional pay scales til well beyond the upper edge...
So I assume they (MFTS) will generate their own home-grown maintenance and engineering staff and pay them some bonemeal and gruel.

I would love to see this course of which you speak for the Phenom.

nor the instructors who will have to teach it nor CFS(H).........

The paucity of Mil A2s IS an issue - where are the experienced Flt Cdrs coming from, where are the supervisors and who will be on CFS(H)?

As for Ascent's money men - lets hope they weren't borrowed from Carillion.........

bose-x, surely there will have been a TNA produced for RAF ME pilot training? In which there will have been a training gap analysis, training media assessment and a recommended course design?

Of course if the TNA was based on the training gap analysis for a given input standard, which was subsequently changed, then it will no longer be valid.

I am sure they have; what they don't seem to have sewn up quite so well is:

• The syllabi
• Experienced flight commanders and supervisors
• Licenced engineers (willing to top up with their pension, in a market they don't need to)
• An airframe that is fit for purpose in regard to rearcrew training (50% of the throughput).

But ,yes, no doubt they have the financial side nicely sewn up.


Pedant note: Soteria wasn't a bidder on MFTS so I am not sure why you are using a slightly irrelevant comparison?

I would more wonder about people who have no qualification on type and are working out how to do things in the sim having never flown the type writing training materials would produce the correct output standard?

Are the civvies, who run training at Valley, further down this road?

All this talk about rotary and multi engine stuff has avoided the IV Squadron QFI output, to train the trainers for 208 to train the new typhoon drivers.

Can we at least be cheered up that one part of the system is working as planned, and as required, and on target?

The relevant syllabuses are available to those involved in delivering them.

Your comment about A2s shows how little you know about the way Shawbury runs - the Flt Cdrs have been typically fresh B1s who need something sexy on their OJAR. They usually hand over the Flt Cdr gig to allow them time to prepare for an A2...and those who achieve the upgrade either get promoted, get posted, or leave! Or, in a few cases, move to CFS(H). And being an A2 isn't needed to be a supervisor - there are some A2s who have made terrible bosses/supervisors, and plenty of B1s who have done very well.

MGD, the reference to Soteria was purely a nod to Crab's background, rather than any suggestion of a link between them and Ascent! And crewman training is only a small fraction of the RW task - this isn't to say that the rumours surrounding suitability of the Juno for crewman training, if true, aren't concerning and disappointing - but it is misleading to suggest that the new aircraft might be unsuited to 50% of Ascent's task.

Airpolice Except its nearly 2 years since 208 disbanded.

your comment shows how little you know about how Shawbury is supposed to run, was run and should be run. All Flt Cdrs and Sqn Bosses used to have to be A2 but there aren't enough to go round so B1s are used instead. Having A2s in the important posts allows better supervision, standardisation, assessment and oversight, especially of struggling students. That goes hand in hand with mentoring B2s and progressing B1s to A2.

Exactly who has got the syllabi then? Since no-one isactually delivering the training I assume from your political answer, not very many and certainly not those capable of scrutinising it with a professional eye.

I don't know what you think I had to do with Soteria, you do know it was Bristow who got UKSAR??

How about the authority pilots who have never flown the aircraft being asked to train the Ascent Instructors in order the Ascent Instructors can be made to write the training course? A second generation of pilots who have never flown the aircraft....... :p:p

TorqueoftheDevil

Your facts are incorrect. Rearcrew training makes up in excess of 50% of the rotary training task under MFTS, and NOT a small fraction.

It's always such a privilege when the King of the World takes the time to tell us how we should be doing our jobs. I must confess, Your Majesty, that DHFS has been doing it wrong all these years. Thank Goodness we're starting with a clean sheet rather than clinging onto the old, substandard system. Those poor, poor students from the last 20 years...

I must be seeing things. Or maybe the Junos which appear to be busy on training sorties are simply floating around the skies aimlessly, terrorising the residents of Shropshire for no reason at all.

Again, I consider myself both enlightened, and grateful for the enlightenment. But then it's hard to keep up to date with everything when I'm so busy delivering terrible flying training. One thing I seem to recall a while ago was your repeated forecasts of doom (suspended for a short period when Bristow were recruiting - obviously, it would be wrong for royalty to interfere during such a delicate process) about civvies taking over SAR - could you just confirm that Bristow SAR has been an unmitigated disaster?

Soteria was Thales who had nothing to do with MFTS.
MFTS(RW) must surely all be staffed now, bar the shouting. Come April - it's 'away the lads' - into the great unknown, training those 6 lads and lasses needed to staff the front line of our glorious 21st century fighting force.
In fact, surely Ascent must have a bigger complement than the RAF, no?

TOTD - perhaps you should ask around the grown-ups at Shawbury to find out that what I describe regarding A2s and superivison was exactly what happened at Shawbury under DHFS for many years - the gradual depletion of the number of A2s was not intentional but happened because fewer QHIs wanted the nause of doing the upgrade.

Are you seeing any students training on the Juno? Oh no, that will be the staff being converted onto type which will be a completely different syllabus from the main Shawbury course - that is what I mean about no syllabus, the one for the main course is AWOL.

You might be interested to know that Bristow are struggling financially and the UKSAR contract is the only thing keeping them profitable - despite this they are pushing hard to cut costs within SAR so it certainly isn't all sweetness and light there.

Ascent is the same people rebadged into civilian uniforms. I wonder where delivering civilian expertise actually came into the equation?

Perhaps the RAF should have been given the shiny new buildings and kit and been left to get on with it.........

Thomas coupling and bose-x

On rotary 59 out of 102 instructors are military, and on fixed wing 71 out of 133 are military.

Hardly as you portray eh?

Actually I was referring to the company as a whole.

However on fixed wing Grob and Phenom out of the few civilian Instructors only a couple are not ex mil.

Wow, lots of opinions floating around here. I can see not many of them are informed.


Be advised, those of us actually doing the job don't really care about your uninformed opinions.


Do please carry on though, it provides moments of entertainment in days otherwise interrupted by....oh yes, flying. Students too!

:p:p:p:p

Crap - it has just dawned on me that the place was doing fine until I arrived, and then the rot seems to have set in. Could you remind us, Your Maj, when you were last on the staff of DHFS, and how many of the DHFS flying units you have served on?

Of course there aren't any ab initio students flying Juno/Jupiter just yet - the contract to do that doesn't start until April. Until then, Ascent are perfectly entitled to be training staff and fettling what they do. Even in April, only one of their six squadrons will receive students. And why should they publish their syllabuses? Have the military ever done that? Have other commerical training ventures?

I'm not really that interested in Bristow's financial situation, as it wasn't the commercial aspects of their operation about which you were so derisory, was it?

Dear oh dear TOTD, your teddy must be tired of being thrown out of the cot - no, I haven't instructed at DHFS but I have instructed at Shawbury (2 Sqn and CFS(H)), Valley, Wattisham, Middle Wallop and Chivenor since 1989 and been an A2 since 1991 on several different types so I think I am entitled to an opinion about MFTS - just remind me where you have instructed and for how long and at what level before you start throwing insults around.

So I was correct, there isn't a syllabus yet for the Shawbury courses with only a month and a half to go............

As for Bristow - yes it was exactly the financial side I was concerned about because it drives everything else - for example the dilution of SAR experience when you have to absorb senior crews from the offshore side and the huge cost of training people on 139 and then re-training onto 189 (which still isn't complete btw).

Oh ffs get a room you two.

Oh good, the internet police have turned up..... :ugh:

There is not a course for the Phenom. The instructors who have never flown the type are being made to write the course. Hardly conducive to flight safety.

As a result of this thread the COO sent out a letter threatening the staff to keep their mouths shut. The closing line suggesting the RAF police are going to investigate the RAF guys who may have contributed to the thread in some way. Evening Al!

I understand they even have instructors resigning now in frustrated by the cluster **** it’s becoming....

Not sure the RAF Plod work for Ascent, though if the COO is correct, I hope the MOD are rebilling him for their time.

Fair point, guilty as charged. But we have to keep JAJ amused somehow! Please allow me three points to entice HRH to my lonely boudoir. Crab, like you, I am an A2 and have been on several types. I haven't been QHIing for nearly as long as you, but I do have fairly extensive experience of DHFS (initially as a student but more importantly, for the current topic, as staff). Of course you're entitled to your opinion, but please accept that you have extremely limited factual knowledge of either the old or the new, and your chum at Shawbury (who also has little factual knowledge about the new era) may not be a reliable source.

Sorry - I genuinely don't see how you deduce this. And if the planned syllabuses are being tweaked as the start date approaches, why shouldn't they be? The 'old' DHFS syllabuses have been improved/changed/'streamlined' countless times.

Bullsh!t. Remember all that guff about 330-degree radars? Anyway, time to start my long-overdue search for the Prodigal Teddy.

So, my 3 points then:
I have considerably more than one chum at Strawbs and on both sides of the fence - I am not in the habit of mentioning things that do not come from reliable (but deniable for their own protection) sources.

there are a whole bunch of massively experienced instructors who could be used to tweak the syllabus - if it is complete (or nearly so) why wouldn't you market-test it on those who will deliver it?

Btw the 'old' DHFS syllabus was a cut and paste from the even older Gazelle 2 AFTS syllabus so it had some pedigree - can you say that about the shiny new one?

I admire your positive spin on MFTS and I hope you aren't disappointed with it but I won't be holding my breath..........

that was and remains a factor - the new SAR model doesn't have Radops (even though the ex-mil ones will monitor the letdown) so you have the co-pilot doing it instead - not a particular problem if it is regularly trained for but it still lacks the flexibility and assurance of a Radop with (almost) full radar coverage - ask a Radop if you don't believe me.

I remember swapping helicopter types for one small, but significantly important, organisation.

The first thing we were told about our future operational needs was that we had to totally re-think them and re-design them to fit our perceived needs...and then look forward to adjusting them to fit our actual needs when we got the practice of using them.

It was like trying to compare a Leyland Truck to an MG Roadster. Their only similarity are wheels and tyres and even they are profoundly different in needs, form and function. The philosophy behind each design is differently interpreted by different people with different backgrounds for a different perception of a need.

I'll let you decide which vehicle is which for your conversations.

You'll have to work a bit harder then....if it's not the bloody crosswind out of limits, it's the fire truck breaking down or an icy runway!


At least the propellers are remaining intact!

Considerably more than me then - must be my banter.

Erm that is pretty much what is going on! But you don't expect every single instructor to be asked for their tuppence worth, surely? Especially those who work for a rival outfit who bid unsuccessfully for the same contract?

Well let's see how it turns out once ab initio student training is under way, and praise or pillory Ascent as appropriate.

Again, let's see how it turns out. If it's awful, I promise to hold my breath for a very long time, to avoid any more oxygen theft.

I do believe you - but are you saying that this issue (or anything else) has stopped Bristow's delivery of UK SAR being anything other than a runaway success?

TOTD

To correct a few points if I may...

"Erm that is pretty much what is going on! But you don't expect every single instructor to be asked for their tuppence worth, surely? Especially those who work for a rival outfit who bid unsuccessfully for the same contract?"

Cobham did not ever bid against Ascent for a contract. They are not, and have never been, competing rivals. Cobham bid, unsuccessfully as you say, against various rivals for the aircraft and services provision - which was won by Airbus. This was a sub-contracted role, sub-ordinate to Ascent.

"Well let's see how it turns out once ab initio student training is under way, and praise or pillory Ascent as appropriate."

The Cobham Staff moving across to Ascent will make sure it works, simply because they know what it is supposed to look, feel, and smell like. They know what is required, Ascent are still learning. Nothing wrong in that of course, but it would have been a much more expedient process if they had hired the correct people in the first place...I shall leave that one there.

"I do believe you - but are you saying that this issue (or anything else) has stopped Bristow's delivery of UK SAR being anything other than a runaway success?[/QUOTE]"

Runaway success? Yes, I agree. Why? Because they hired military experts and LISTENED to them!

who will be TUPEd across to deliver that syllabus - your argument makes no sense.

happy to wait for that and, if it is good, I will say so - if it is not, will you?

Not quite what I hear from some experienced MRT and Lifeboat crew members, particularly wrt joint exercises, but that might be a case of opcon and budgetary constraints.

Yes, if you define runaway success as still not meeting the terms of the contract (the 139s have not been fully replaced by 189s yet).

As EE said, they hired the right people, most of whom were experienced military SAR crews so the standard was always going to be high. However, the financial fragility of the mother company and the extra costs of training (139 to 189) within SAR do cause me to wonder at the plan B if a 'Carrillion-style' mismanagement to save money results in them struggling.

When they have been going 5 years with consistent training levels, then you can consider it a runaway success perhaps.

Touchdown autos on H135?
 

Just thought of something else, re the RW students and will they be conducting full touchdown autorotations in the Airbus H135 or will that be in the sim mainly with the odd practise in the airframe. I know that the H135 can have issues (not with the autos) but with airframe after a full touchdown.


I know their system is way different to ours but the Bundeswehr - HeeresfliegerInternationale Hubschrauber Ausbildiung Zentrum at Buckeberg has a contract with Motorflug. The company provides several Bell 206B based at Buckeberg .for the very purpose of autoration training and practise. This supplements their RW course on sims and H135.

At the same token, as of xmas ...the Bundeswehr is also outsourcing flying training to ADAC Luftfahrt Technik GmbH, the company will be providing 4 x H135.

Cheers

Fair point, I was in a hurry and I got the terminology wrong. But the main point stands ie there are plenty of massively experienced instructors already involved in RW MFTS, so there is no need to consult every individual. And anyway, the remaining Cobham staff are busy delivering the last of the old courses. And also...actually let's not go there.

As I'm sure you know, those involved in preparing for RW MFTS are all current serving military, very recently ex-military, or some of the best ex-Cobham aircrew. Yes, some of those who have been involved since the very early stages of RW MFTS hide their talents very well, but they appear to have been very rapidly allocated to roles which best suit their strengths. The only people who would decry the credentials or ability of the current Ascent team are presumably individuals who applied unsuccessfully for the same positions. This is not to say that everything is guaranteed to go smoothly on Day One, but there aren't many chinks in the armour of the team now trying to make it work.

As I'm sure you also know, Bristow SAR isn't quite Mil SAR in red and white aircraft. Some of the military folk who tried to tell Bristow how to do it (or told them that they wouldn't be able to do it) found their services were inexplicably not needed. Others, who made their points in a more constructive way, have played a part in shaping what goes on, but you make it sound like Bristow had no idea how to set up or deliver SAR until the mil guys and girls joined and saved the day. This is rather misleading!

I hadn't realised how influential you were TOTD - you seem to know who from Cobham will be employed which is far more than they do as the Matrix selection process hasn't been completed yet.

No wonder you believe everything you are told about MFTS and its future.......

Have you any idea what a disaster the regular deployment to Middle Wallop for tac and NVG is going to be??????

nice little jibe TOTD, about what I have come to expect. I have said before that they did me a favour and I am certainly far better off professionally and personally than if I had sold my soul for a Scottish Island posting.

I got the impression that they were anti-RAF (probably my fault entirely) but strange that many of the trainers and influential players are ex-RAF now - cream will rise to the top;)

Touchdown autos in the H135 are prohibited for training.