Flying training in trouble?
-
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 5947
- Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:08 pm
- Location: 59°09N 002°38W
- Gender:
- Age: 80
Flying training in trouble?
Ricardian, Stronsay, Orkney UK
www.stronsaylimpet.co.uk
visitstronsay.com
https://www.wunderground.com/forecast/EGER
www.stronsaylimpet.co.uk
visitstronsay.com
https://www.wunderground.com/forecast/EGER
Re: Flying training in trouble?
Yes, MFTS has been a 'disaster, darling' for some time, and shows the benefits to the nation by the government's 'out-sourcing' to a private company. We eagerly await the Tory privatisation of the NHS. It will save so much money, won't it................
- Fox3WheresMyBanana
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 12987
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:51 pm
- Location: Great White North
- Gender:
- Age: 61
Re: Flying training in trouble?
I told the RAF it would, in writing, on my PVR form 30 years ago.
Civilianisation/Out-sourcing, reduction of training hours, and the government getting the country into stupid wars were my three reasons for leaving.
I subsequently discovered I was not the only one who had listed these exact three reasons.
It does not give me pleasure to be right.
But neither the RAF nor the Government can claim they were not told.
The simple truth is that the arrogant cowards were not listening.
And they still aren't. I do not think they are capable of listening. They are not capable of reasoning.
They cherry-pick bits of facts and logic to use as PR to support their existing beliefs, mostly in their own infallibility.
They absolutely are not prepared to have a proper logical argument, about anything.
Nor, as we see with the MSM, and "hate-speech" and "misinformation" offences, is anyone else allowed to have a logical argument in public.
Civilianisation/Out-sourcing, reduction of training hours, and the government getting the country into stupid wars were my three reasons for leaving.
I subsequently discovered I was not the only one who had listed these exact three reasons.
It does not give me pleasure to be right.
But neither the RAF nor the Government can claim they were not told.
The simple truth is that the arrogant cowards were not listening.
And they still aren't. I do not think they are capable of listening. They are not capable of reasoning.
They cherry-pick bits of facts and logic to use as PR to support their existing beliefs, mostly in their own infallibility.
They absolutely are not prepared to have a proper logical argument, about anything.
Nor, as we see with the MSM, and "hate-speech" and "misinformation" offences, is anyone else allowed to have a logical argument in public.
- 4mastacker
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 5141
- Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 5:38 pm
- Location: With the wife
- Gender:
- Age: 76
Re: Flying training in trouble?
CAS was in front of the Defence Select Committee earlier today and the subject of pilot training was very much a topic at the session. The reactions on the face of the silver-haired bloke sitting behind CAS is quite "interesting".
CAS at the Defence Select Committee
CAS at the Defence Select Committee
It's always my fault - SWMBO
- Fox3WheresMyBanana
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 12987
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:51 pm
- Location: Great White North
- Gender:
- Age: 61
Re: Flying training in trouble?
The entire RAF now appears to be Operation Sleepy Weasel..
..with Wigston as Chief Weasel.
I note he completely dodged the question on who actually gets through fast jet training in 35 months, the real answer being nobody, and no one even close to it.
..with Wigston as Chief Weasel.
I note he completely dodged the question on who actually gets through fast jet training in 35 months, the real answer being nobody, and no one even close to it.
- 4mastacker
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 5141
- Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 5:38 pm
- Location: With the wife
- Gender:
- Age: 76
Re: Flying training in trouble?
Wiggy is a smooth, competent operator compared to the RN 3* in this DSC meeting the previous day.
The RN face the Defence Select Committee
The RN face the Defence Select Committee
It's always my fault - SWMBO
Re: Flying training in trouble?
Watching the Committee in action it looks as though Marshall appeared thinking he would be asked about his personal areas of responsibility - the Type 31 and Fleet Solid Support (whatever that is), rather than the future of the Navy in general and was correspondingly ill prepared or uncertain what he could or could not divulge. He was obviously ill at ease and must know what the results of the POW investigation show, but I guess that issue will be taken on by people further up the food chain before being kicked into the long grass - there is a bad smell about the business. I don't know what his background is - engineer, executive or logistics but it seems to me that the person sitting in that chair should have been the First Sea Lord rather than someone lower in the hierarchy who was not such a smooth, politically evasive, but competent person as some others and came across as ill prepared for the fray. Without a more senior person being interrogated the Committee is being treated with some contempt.
The British armed forces have been allowed to fester and shrink for years and unless the Government is prepared to keep the country away from future confrontations then the boys and girls will be sacrificed on the altar of money saving political expediency. It almost appeared to me that the Committee was impressed by the idea that there might be 19 escort vessels in a few years time rather than 18. Good God! When the carrier (singular) puts to sea with its pathetic air group it would be wise to have it escorted by some more escorts from other countries. Marshall, trying to use fashionable political/business expressions failed to make it clear that the Navy just won't have 19 vessels available should Putin's fleet come sailing into the North Sea, as there will be some on deployment abroad and some in major refits. That's the case 'going forward' (or in the 'future' as we call it). It's in action that the competency or otherwise of all three diminished armed forces will be judged, not on political weasel words.
The British armed forces have been allowed to fester and shrink for years and unless the Government is prepared to keep the country away from future confrontations then the boys and girls will be sacrificed on the altar of money saving political expediency. It almost appeared to me that the Committee was impressed by the idea that there might be 19 escort vessels in a few years time rather than 18. Good God! When the carrier (singular) puts to sea with its pathetic air group it would be wise to have it escorted by some more escorts from other countries. Marshall, trying to use fashionable political/business expressions failed to make it clear that the Navy just won't have 19 vessels available should Putin's fleet come sailing into the North Sea, as there will be some on deployment abroad and some in major refits. That's the case 'going forward' (or in the 'future' as we call it). It's in action that the competency or otherwise of all three diminished armed forces will be judged, not on political weasel words.
-
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 3286
- Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2022 11:40 pm
- Location: Unfashionable end of the Western Spiral
Re: Flying training in trouble?
My necessaries are embark'd: farewell. Adieu! I have too grieved a heart to take a tedious leave.
- 4mastacker
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 5141
- Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 5:38 pm
- Location: With the wife
- Gender:
- Age: 76
Re: Flying training in trouble?
Oh how the standards of the RAF's senior officers have slipped over the years. I recall some from my time in the light blue who were truly inspirational leaders but now, I fear, if push ever came to shove, then our leaders will be found severely lacking despite the best efforts of the lads and lasses on the front line.Fox3WheresMyBanana wrote: ↑Wed Feb 01, 2023 11:48 pmThe entire RAF now appears to be Operation Sleepy Weasel..
..with Wigston as Chief Weasel.
I note he completely dodged the question on who actually gets through fast jet training in 35 months, the real answer being nobody, and no one even close to it.
It's always my fault - SWMBO
Re: Flying training in trouble?
Fitting the well-known cliche of
"Leaders people follow more out of curiosity than loyalty"
"Leaders people follow more out of curiosity than loyalty"
- Fox3WheresMyBanana
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 12987
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:51 pm
- Location: Great White North
- Gender:
- Age: 61
Re: Flying training in trouble?
".., and at a safe distance"
!
!
Re: Flying training in trouble?
Letter to the Telegraph today:
SIR – During my RAF career I was actively involved with recruiting and selection, and we always chose the best person for the role to be filled.
Achievements in earlier life were measured against the opportunities available to the applicant. Assessments were made as to the individual’s ability to cope with the training, as well as the mental and physical demands of the role. While most were rejected for not showing the necessary potential, some were rejected for being over-qualified – they were unlikely to achieve job satisfaction or “stickability”.
These criteria were applied to all, regardless of gender, ethnicity or religion, in order to select the best. This should still be the case. There are no prizes for coming second in a war.
Wing Commander Ivan Childs (retd)
Martock, Somerset
SIR – During my RAF career I was actively involved with recruiting and selection, and we always chose the best person for the role to be filled.
Achievements in earlier life were measured against the opportunities available to the applicant. Assessments were made as to the individual’s ability to cope with the training, as well as the mental and physical demands of the role. While most were rejected for not showing the necessary potential, some were rejected for being over-qualified – they were unlikely to achieve job satisfaction or “stickability”.
These criteria were applied to all, regardless of gender, ethnicity or religion, in order to select the best. This should still be the case. There are no prizes for coming second in a war.
Wing Commander Ivan Childs (retd)
Martock, Somerset
- Fox3WheresMyBanana
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 12987
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:51 pm
- Location: Great White North
- Gender:
- Age: 61
Re: Flying training in trouble?
Unfortunately, Wg Cdr Childs is wrong. There are no prizes for coming second in a war of annihilation.
There can be lots of prizes for the leader who loses and pulls out of a war he didn't start, in another country.
The debacle of Afghanistan will not make any critical difference to Biden or the other leaders, or their parties.
The money that can now be spent elsewhere might.
And that has been true throughout history.
There can be lots of prizes for the leader who loses and pulls out of a war he didn't start, in another country.
The debacle of Afghanistan will not make any critical difference to Biden or the other leaders, or their parties.
The money that can now be spent elsewhere might.
And that has been true throughout history.
-
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 14669
- Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2017 8:17 am
- Location: Gravity be the clue
- Gender:
- Age: 80
Re: Flying training in trouble?
No, I think that is semantics. If annihilation is one of two outcomes there is certainly no second prize nor the option for pulling out.
Yesterday was a 'well qualified' 'white male reject' given as an example of recruiting gender bias. Actually every candidate will feel that the rejection was wrong. In fact he went on to day that his leadership skills were not sufficient and to reapply in 6 months. What no one has highlighted is the changing requirements and changed population.
In 1961 the RAF was recruiting around 1,300 aircrew per year, the majority as pilots. This from a male population of 26 millions (roughly).
In 2005 the RAF was recruiting only 120 pilot candidates per year from a total population of around 66 millions. It should not take a genius to work out that competition will be much increased.
Yesterday was a 'well qualified' 'white male reject' given as an example of recruiting gender bias. Actually every candidate will feel that the rejection was wrong. In fact he went on to day that his leadership skills were not sufficient and to reapply in 6 months. What no one has highlighted is the changing requirements and changed population.
In 1961 the RAF was recruiting around 1,300 aircrew per year, the majority as pilots. This from a male population of 26 millions (roughly).
In 2005 the RAF was recruiting only 120 pilot candidates per year from a total population of around 66 millions. It should not take a genius to work out that competition will be much increased.
- Ex-Ascot
- Test Pilot
- Posts: 13096
- Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2015 7:16 am
- Location: Botswana but sometimes Greece
- Gender:
- Age: 68
Re: Flying training in trouble?
The CAS was not exactly punchy. First thing you are told about public speaking is not to err and um. We had a lot of that. Other CASs I have know would have made mincemeat out of that committee.
'Yes, Madam, I am drunk, but in the morning I shall be sober and you will still be ugly.' Sir Winston Churchill.