Indeed but burning holes in the sky isn’t really the output of VGS.
While 612 did actually achieve a lot and aren’t a bad VGS by any means, the “task” there is an arbitrary number of hours/launches per aircraft.
It doesn’t take into account if a VGS actually has the designated number of aircraft or a hangar or a serviceable airfield.
A common method for some Vigilant Sqn’s was to “borrow” extra aircraft for week courses making it easier to achieve that “target percentage”
Nor does it account for soaring in the conventional fleet where a GIC maybe completed in a single soaring trip a Viking VGS could then lose 4 flights against “target” for the same output.
All those weeks of “waiting for Ministerial sign off” and nobody thought to prepare a Q&A or statement to be despatched to ALL-ACO as soon as we got wind of Julian Brazier letting the cat out of the bag in the HoC. From the look of my Facebook wall last night, some poor CFAVs had to deal with 101 questions from staff & cadets alike last night - and all they had to refer to was a SharePoint note saying “please read this” and a message from Commandant apologising about being “behind the drag curve as we were unable to release any information until we knew that the plan had Ministerial endorsement”. A prepared Q&A to take to squadron’s last night would’ve at least given staff a bit of a heads up. The one I felt most sorry for was an OC who was told BY A CADET what had happened - he didn’t have access to Facebook at work and when he checked his OC account, there was nothing relating to gliding in it.
I am pretty disgusted with this whole affair from start to now. I’d like to think things will improve, but, alas, I fear they won’t. CFAVs continue to be treated like mushrooms and treated with absolute contempt and we’re about to enter in a further 2 years of potentially no gliding whilst things are “recovered”. With the average “cadet lifespan” of 2 years - that’s two generations of cadets who’ve only seen and heard rumours of this gliding activity.
It’s a sad and sorry state of affairs. But don’t worry. We’ve got flight sims, a cross channel swim and baton relays to look forward to.
Not Trying to take sides but I do not think the ACO knew that document was about to be released yesterday. The CAC knows the pressure and interest in this and I recon would of had a response ready…
Look at the mince sent out about DYER and TORs I would of been surprised if they hadn’t put something into place if they knew about it.
A very good friend sent me the gliding brief yesterday morning as he was looking on that government website as another document had been released on it too, it was a kind of “your eyes only” document, confirming what people in his position knew about the national grid and he saw the ACO doc opened that and when he went back it had been removed, perhaps they were doing a dump of information and it was sent out with out people knowing like the other document… PERHAPS!
Personally I think the announcment has been dealt with wrongly; FB is not the place to deliver the information across the organisation. There was time to put something in place ready for the announcement a matter what any one says.
I was caught up in the SDSR 10 announcement that Harrier was being disposed of. We were all told to be the hangar at 0900 and briefed fully by OC JFH and told about the announcement that was to be given in the House at 1430; but told that the information was embargoed until 1430. Everyone was good with this, yes some were to be posted and some had to look at other areas of work. But OC JFH held his head high and told us as it was.
The details would have been know to the CoC, no matter what anyone says, so a briefing note could have been issued across the piece at 1435 so people would have been aware before it hit social media.
I cannot believe Comdt AC and 2FTS had no idea what was going to be announced in the HoC about their organisation. I as a sqn OC would expect and deserve some sort or brief about how this will effect the gliding that my cadets would expect to have in the future. I will be parading on my sqn tonight and when I say does anybody have any questions; I expect a few. The cadets and other staff on the sqn will expecy an answer, an answer I don’t have.
People in my wing are already talking about gliding being a weekend activity. Traveling times and early starts and all that. There are people here saying that a days gliding is unfeasible. Has the ACO thought of this?
Is the ACO going to build hard accommodation, who will do the cooking and how many cadets will these Super Sqn be able to take for an allocation.
[quote=“the_silverback, post:903, topic:1152, full:true”]I cannot believe Comdt AC and 2FTS had no idea what was going to be announced in the HoC about their organisation. I as a sqn OC would expect and deserve some sort or brief about how this will effect the gliding that my cadets would wxpect to have in the future. I will be parading on my sqn tonight and when I say does anybody have any questions; I expect a few. The cadets and other staff on the sqn will expecy an answer, an answer I don’t have.
I AM A MUSHROOM.[/quote]
CAC, OC 2FTS and I imagine several others knew exactly what was coming and quite conveniently hid behind ‘we can’t say anything’ and then got bitten by the way they love to disseminate information.
I was at the sqn last night and just did a Gallic shrug, with I know no more than anything anyone has seen. No one was surprised, that as the OC I knew no more than them.
My Chairman came down last night after seeing it and said he was going to ask why 23 months after the gliders were grounded, there is a statement that it seems it was decided some time ago that it would be too expensive to fix the gliders and no one in the proper ATC (ie squadrons) had been told this and now we are having to wait until May before they can even start looking at fixing them. As he said, he can speak to our MP to ask a question in The House and ask awkward questions and not be got at or told to shut up like I probably would be. He laughed at the idea of flight sims being regarded as a substitute. I can’t actually say how he described HQAC and how disgusted he is that the cadets have been treated so badly over the last two years and an undecided period into the future.
So, with this new approach to gliding (as I understand it) we are probably loosing one of the greatest successes of the VGSs. The fact that a cadet can go solo, become a staff cadet and, sometimes within a year if he/she puts the hours/days/weeks in, be carrying other cadets as passengers. That was an enormous thing for other cadets to see; inspirational.
It was carried out with a degree of safety that the AEFs (that retired officers flying club) could only dream of. The cost was low because everyone was a volunteer and everyone was part of the ACO, not an untrained employee of Babcock’s.
Of course, it started to fall apart after the AEFs started killing cadets and the big air force decided that cadet flying needed its form of “professional” management. The truth is they never understood it because it was different.
It would seem that GIC is probably now unlikely to be revived (if only because of the distances involved) and therefore the decades of the old progression of Staff Cadet to A category instructor will also stop. Air cadet gliding will now be perceived by most cadets as a sort of flying shop run by people far away from the Squadrons. People who probably will be more interested in the free flying than the ACO.
But never mind all that, as long as we can dress minor TV personalities up in a Group Captain’s uniform the ACO is bound to succeed.
We are drifting off the point a little here but the numbers are there so lets entertain discussion
Although I agree with the points you raise I argue that to a degree these factors were taken into account given each VGS has its own “tasking” expectations, numbers which must come from HQAC in some form of another.
The likes of Kinloss and St Athan are allocated 600 hours while Henlow and Cosford tasked with 2.5 times more flying with 1500 hours.
This tasking must take into account the number of aircraft, the number of available “flying days” else why have such a wide variation between Squadrons??
Look at the file I have linked to, the tabs show launches and hours. Predannack were only tasked with 2910 launches, Syerston and Kenley 6750.
I agree comparing Viking and Vigilant efficiency is not straight forward but if a VGS has a target bespoke to them (or at least scaled in some manner) that must be taking into account the various factors that allow/restrict them to operate and so if sticking to only compare Vikings and Vigilant separately it still shows a measurable factor.
Consider the third tab “quals” and it further shows a comparison.
612 achieved 1079 GICs and 75 GS/GS solos a figure higher than anyone else that year, but were not tasked with the most hours/launches.
If I had the time and interest and it made a difference a comparison of tasking, achieved and qualifications would be interesting to look at effectiveness. 612 may have flown lots but if only achieving a handful of awards per hour of flying it is not as impressive. On a quick glance however the numbers don’t show that.
The only VGS to break through 1000 GICs, despite four VGS allocated more hours, and Halton having matched hours (who achieved ~50% the awards in ~50% the time so it would seem as effective if not as operationally efficient)
The numbers are not perfect, and that is clear Halton has a grass airfield, Abingdon tarmac so the number of operational days will not be the same yet they have a matched “target” but given these are then numbers we have as a rough and read comparison. I amsure studying the numbers other examples would be found, Abingdon is an easy example to look at given it is at the top without having a tasking to be.
Factors not considered here are the catchment area…the numbers of hours achieved per Cadet “served”
As if driving to Leuchars wasn’t long enough for NE Scotland cadets to participate in gliding - if it actually ever happens - we would be expected to drive all the way to Kirknewton, that is a 2hr 54min (143mi) drive from my Squadron vs 1hr 43min (71mi) to Kinloss. Not realistic at all
As mentioned previously, the statements “As VGS are run by volunteer staffs, this will not result in any job losses” and “The RAF is extremely grateful for the volunteers that support each VGS; without this support Air Cadet gliding would not be possible” effectively show that the reality that the powers that be are only ‘bean counters’ and that CFAV personnel aren’t that valued as they are ‘unpaid’ & PHEW at least we don’t have redundancy payments to consider…
I also find it incredulous that the higher ups claim ignorance of decisions!
Where has the ‘Air’ in Air Training Corps gone? and yes I said ATC not the corporate Air Cadets or should I say Royal Air Force Air Cadets…
Air in the Air Training Corps is a thing of the past because the RAF have got involved and as pointed out above they don’t understand it.
The fact that 5 AEF was allowed to move without Air Traffic provision for weekend flying is a prime indicator of this lack of understanding.
People mention that we need former RAF personnel in management positions to link us better to the RAF, well over the last 8/9 years this little group haven’t covered themselves in glory and we should face the fact the ATC / AC / RAFAC is just nice little number for people who have had a RAF career just to keep playing at it.
I think you might find that the move of the Tutor fleet to RAF Wittering was done under the EFTS and UAS umbrella, the issue with 5 AEF was only a small part of the issue; okay, a large issue in respect of the ACO, but you will find Tutors buzzing around Monday to Friday without any problems at all. CCF don’t mind, they get to fly on Wednesday afternoons!!
What I mean is that when the move was planned as part of the ‘project’ there should have been a critical path which has a number of points that need to be met before moving on, the fact we are in the situation we are in is due to ineffective project management. It doesn’t matter who was responsible, it was their failure but was probably met with a “so what” when people pointed it out. Air Cadets who or what are they anyway.
