RAF Drone Controllers
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: cambridge
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF Drone Controllers
Who can explain why RAF Drone Controllers wear a flying suit whilst sitting in a portacabin flying a drone? Flying suits used to be an expensive item of prtctive flying clothing. That's why they are called flying suits!
Also, and recognising that some Drone Controllers are current or retired RAF aircrew, why is it that drone controllers are sitting in a portacabin wearing a flying suit adorned by "RAF issued drone pilot wings" which look like the real thing, notwithstanding that they have never flown an aeroplane. One needs to be very sharp eyed to tell the difference between RAF pilot wings and RAF Drone controller wings!
This is an impersonation rant!
Also, and recognising that some Drone Controllers are current or retired RAF aircrew, why is it that drone controllers are sitting in a portacabin wearing a flying suit adorned by "RAF issued drone pilot wings" which look like the real thing, notwithstanding that they have never flown an aeroplane. One needs to be very sharp eyed to tell the difference between RAF pilot wings and RAF Drone controller wings!
This is an impersonation rant!
terry holloway asks indignantly, indeed "rants", in his own words:
Yet he provides his own thoughts and justifications in relation to another Walt who has strong connections with his employment at at Marshall:
Once another contributor kindly helped out with a very clear picture of same, with "There you go Terry. A clear image of "Walt-wings".":
At least the RAF drone pilots were wearing the wings, as presented to them by the RAF, for doing their jobs!
Perhaps the thread starter should refrain from criticising them for such outrageous behaviour - blatantly wearing the wings bestowed upon them by the RAF - and should go easy on them, as surely they've suffered enough.
why is it that drone controllers are sitting in a portacabin wearing a flying suit adorned by "RAF issued drone pilot wings" which look like the real thing, notwithstanding that they have never flown an aeroplane. One needs to be very sharp eyed to tell the difference between RAF pilot wings and RAF Drone controller wings!
This is an impersonation rant!
This is an impersonation rant!
Re the wings, I really couldn't make them out and I really do need to see a better photo! The chum (who I mentioned in the earlier post about RN wings) made the point that as an ex fleet air arm pilot he and others were outraged that TCT had been given Navy wings and thus I assumed that is what is on her left breast. If they were awarded to her she is entitled, of course, to wear them. Like many others I believe such wings should be properly earned, but if the services decide to give them out in such a way that's really up to them.
That could not be clearer. Thank you! Pre 1952 (wire?) wings, which predate her. Presumably a talisman which she referred to in a statement. The MoD ceremonial office should be able to explain the legal position on wearing historic insignia. Personally I wouldn't wear something (like those wings) which could lead to criticism by others, but dressed like that she is hardly posing as an RAF pilot. Those who go to the Goodwood meetings every year, and elsewhere, dressed in the full modern uniform with wings are rather more guilty of being imposters. There is a post elsewhere on Prune about uniforms and surpriseingly that has attracted little comment, whereas those who seek to continue to vilify TCT on this thread appear to be eager to unearth anything - however remote - which will sustain their unkind campaign, which many find unpleasant and unnecessary. As I said when I first joined this thread hasn't she suffered enough?
Perhaps the thread starter should refrain from criticising them for such outrageous behaviour - blatantly wearing the wings bestowed upon them by the RAF - and should go easy on them, as surely they've suffered enough.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: cambridge
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
terry holloway asks indignantly, indeed "rants", in his own words:
Yet he provides his own thoughts and justifications in relation to another Walt who has strong connections with his employment at at Marshall:
Once another contributor kindly helped out with a very clear picture of same, with "There you go Terry. A clear image of "Walt-wings".":
At least the RAF drone pilots were wearing the wings, as presented to them by the RAF, for doing their jobs!
Perhaps the thread starter should refrain from criticising them for such outrageous behaviour - blatantly wearing the wings bestowed upon them by the RAF - and should go easy on them, as surely they've suffered enough.
Yet he provides his own thoughts and justifications in relation to another Walt who has strong connections with his employment at at Marshall:
Once another contributor kindly helped out with a very clear picture of same, with "There you go Terry. A clear image of "Walt-wings".":
At least the RAF drone pilots were wearing the wings, as presented to them by the RAF, for doing their jobs!
Perhaps the thread starter should refrain from criticising them for such outrageous behaviour - blatantly wearing the wings bestowed upon them by the RAF - and should go easy on them, as surely they've suffered enough.
I could have included a question in my original rant: " why do RAF aircrew wear flying suits for so many non flying activities these days"? Examples are travelling to work, walking around the base and drinking in the bar! What's that all about?
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Same reason people wear polo shirts when not playing polo, rugby shirts when not playing rugby, trainers when not running, and denim jeans when not wrangling or mining. Because as a form of working dress they're comfortable and convenient.
They are still a relatively expensive piece of protective clothing, though I suspect somewhat more robust than they used to be.
People have already tried and failed to impose a 'if you're not flying then you are to wear blues' rule at various RAF stations and it's failed. Not only is it a pointless rule only valued by jobsworths and folks who appear to be envious of having something comfy to wear (I'm sure the same rule should apply to expensive protective MTP combat wear as well no?), but also would be another one of the small annoyances that is driving people away from staying in the military.
They are still a relatively expensive piece of protective clothing, though I suspect somewhat more robust than they used to be.
People have already tried and failed to impose a 'if you're not flying then you are to wear blues' rule at various RAF stations and it's failed. Not only is it a pointless rule only valued by jobsworths and folks who appear to be envious of having something comfy to wear (I'm sure the same rule should apply to expensive protective MTP combat wear as well no?), but also would be another one of the small annoyances that is driving people away from staying in the military.
clear 3
The garments you mention have passed into fashion in that they are worn as every day items and no one thinks anything of it.
Surely flying suits and wings are, or should be, the preserve of those who are trained to fly or crew an aircraft. They are not an every day item of fashionable clothing but merely work clothes intended for work.
The garments you mention have passed into fashion in that they are worn as every day items and no one thinks anything of it.
Surely flying suits and wings are, or should be, the preserve of those who are trained to fly or crew an aircraft. They are not an every day item of fashionable clothing but merely work clothes intended for work.
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt K,
Perhaps I should clarify since I was speaking from the point of view of someone who wears a flying suit when
MTP combats are worn by people around the station for the above-mentioned activities even when they are not intending to go and perform any form of tactical activity in the field. But the original poster does not seem to find any fault with this.
I was suggesting that because RAF blues are not the most comfortable of clothing to wear, people prefer to wear a different style of working dress according to their trade or branch, be it MTP or a growbag and as such will perform routine activities such as
when so-attired.
Perhaps I should clarify since I was speaking from the point of view of someone who wears a flying suit when
travelling to work, walking around the base and drinking in the bar.
MTP combats are worn by people around the station for the above-mentioned activities even when they are not intending to go and perform any form of tactical activity in the field. But the original poster does not seem to find any fault with this.
I was suggesting that because RAF blues are not the most comfortable of clothing to wear, people prefer to wear a different style of working dress according to their trade or branch, be it MTP or a growbag and as such will perform routine activities such as
travelling to work, walking around the base and drinking in the bar
So RAF pilots can wear flying suits to go to the mess and to fly drones, but those of us who wear Nomex and a helmet in a wooden homebuilt with a fuel tank above our knees are dismissed as posers?
(Note: I do not intend to imply RAF pilots are 'posers' - even drone pilots - just pointing out the irony of it).
(Note: I do not intend to imply RAF pilots are 'posers' - even drone pilots - just pointing out the irony of it).
Airpolice: I have Nomex and I'm working on a helmet. I personally don't let other people stop me from wearing the stuff, but I do care when other people voice derision about it. This is the sort of thing I was getting at:
http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...one-domes.html
http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...one-domes.html
Who can explain why RAF Drone Controllers wear a flying suit whilst sitting in a portacabin flying a drone?
I could have included a question in my original rant: " why do RAF aircrew wear flying suits for so many non flying activities these days"? Examples are travelling to work, walking around the base and drinking in the bar! What's that all about?
Can't see the relevance to "Private Flying"
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I always though that "air station" was a term used by the navy, as in naval air station. I grew up near an active RAF base and never heard anyone call it a station. A Group Captain is not a naval rank so maybe that is where the differing terminology comes in. Not an expert in any way so open to other ideas.
That's why they are called flying suits!
CG
PS I was in the distant past RAF aircrew (Puma crewman) and wore a growbag every working day I could get away with it, flying or not. Why? I'm a scruff, and they are much more comfy than blues!
PPS Clear 3's post noted.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sussex, UK
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a fundamental misconception in the original post. All RAF drone pilots complete Elementary Flying Training in the Tutor culminating in an instrument flying test before getting anywhere near a drone. To say that "they have never flown an aeroplane" is patently untrue.
The "Flying Suits" that they wear are basically cotton overalls and I would have thought highly appropriate to working in a shipping container.
The "Flying Suits" that they wear are basically cotton overalls and I would have thought highly appropriate to working in a shipping container.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it is true that drone drivers wear flying suits then it is an interesting question. Flying from a desk in an air conditioned room requires different attire from being in a confined space where the possibility of being ejected into the elements. Maybe they are special drone suits, developed at great expense by a defence contractor? And the wings? No doubt worn by the wearer after training and a demonstration of competence. But is the OP suggesting that a mini PS3/Xbox pin would be more appropriate. After all, we don't want any confusion about the status of wing wearers, do we?
PM
PM
When " woolly pulleys" came in to the RAF in the early 70's, certain members of the GD branch unilaterally started stitching wings on theirs' ( without , initially any sanction). Hence all the wry comments about "and Pyjamas?", "Dressing gowns?" " PT Kit?" etc.
Other branches ( including mine) and trades later caught on to the "wings" wheeze.
And the rot then set in.......
Other branches ( including mine) and trades later caught on to the "wings" wheeze.
And the rot then set in.......
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying suit or Coveralls? They are comfortable specialist clothing worn for protection in aeroplanes . But they are exceptional for posing in! I'd rather wear jeans and a T EE shirt in a container, unless I was posing!!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: At home.
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps the RAF are trying to instill the feeling of being part of the larger community of aviation professionals by making them wear the same clothing as their more mobile colleagues.
I bet they don't make them use a pee tube though!
I bet they don't make them use a pee tube though!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Bury St Edmunds
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just for the record, there is a difference between RAF pilots' brevets and RAF UAV operators' brevets; that part of a pilot's brevet that is coloured a sort of caramelly shade is pale blue on the UAV version. That is not to say that a qualified pilot who finds himself on UAV flying duties has to change his brevet.
