It is ‘safe’ where I deem the risks of the activity to be ALARP and Tolerable and in the interests of the organisation. All elements will be under review as we try a new approach.
1 Like
There’s been a recent VoV question in which it was confirmed that the new ACPS will be a gold badge.
We’ve been round this one (we being the RAvnOs and I) discussing whether it is better to use GS as a filter for ACPS to ensure the right candidates go forward; or, given the paucity of opportunities at the moment, to spread them more thinly. The prevailing view was the former, not helped by quite a high ‘failure’ rate at ACPS post-COVID.
If all candidates have flown solo on a GS, then they will all have a F6424 already (remember it has a validity period, IIRC 2 years); ACPS already required a Class 2 so there is no real change here.
I suspect the boss may already be regretting coming on here; he’s getting a hard time already…
2 Likes
Thanks, that’s a useful summary. How is the streaming done - is it competitive? It’s certainly better than losing the EFT element entirely.
Maybe by being here, he sees and has become aware of the thoughts of those at Squadron which is not always passed up through middle management levels.
2 Likes
Was that failure rate higher than pre COVID? Seems like some temporary variables could have been at play?
We also now have greater roll out of Blue ATP, squadron simulators, and regional ground schools coming online which may help to alleviate any lack of experience that could contribute to failure.
I understand the logic and the premise in this early stage, but would still like to hear at least an openness to testing a relaxation once we’re settled in the new scheme and further down the road of our other, lower level developments.
1 Like
Ha…nothing hard about this. It’s a conversation and, as I have said previously, I am willing to discuss most aspects as long as the discussion is respectful and reasonable. I would observe that the majority of the commentary herein lacks knowledge of risk-based decision-making, duty holding, ALARP and tolerability and service interest. Not a criticism as not many have had either formal training in such things or, most importantly, experience especially from a 2* operational duty holding perspective.
Thanks.
Maybe it’s my poor memory, but I’m pretty sure that during our Teams meeting you indicated that you would not be adverse to revisiting a scheme that would be similar to ACTO35, with the ncessary safe-guarding, etc. OC 2FTS said that his team wouldn’t have the necessary resources to look at this whilst the then ongoing ACPS contract proposals were in progress. However, he then stated that once ACPS contract & associated “due diligence” activity was completed, then looking at the possibility of checking the required due dligence for flying in non-Service aircraft could be viable. I did ask for a link to the meeting recording to refresh my memory but haven’t received anything yet
ACPS is now “sorted” to a degree - using existing AEF facilities / resources, so I would envisage that there are no in-depth “due diligence” aspects that remain to be considered.
For flights in non-Service aircraft, even if (worst case) individual private pilots would be excluded from such a scheme, many CFAVs (especially those with an aviation background) fail to see what perceived risk elements are holding back consideration of CAA ATOs or specific BGA facilities (such as the nominated youth centres). If we wanted to throw in Tutor safety history into the “risk” cooking pot, then throwing off props wasn’t the best - & of course, that have been several groundings for different reasons.
Incidentally, the consideration to use nominated BGA centres as pre-approved locations under ACTO35 was well underway - some yrs ago, I helped out our then Reg Av O with a visit to Cambridge Gliding Centre.. Sadly, this plan was curtailed shortly afterwards - but it meant (at the time) that the option was considered acceptable.
5 Likes
…and we (most of us) recognise this.
We just want to be taken on the journey and the decision making progress explained to us a little better so we understand the why rather than teleporting to the destination with no idea how we got there and then spending our time on forums like these speculating and pontificating without all the relevant information.
Yes, its not a democracy, but we would rather support from a position of knowledge than resist from a position of ignorance
6 Likes
I would also suggest that considering the employment background of many CFAVs, especially those who have higher-level safety supervision requirements, there could be quite a few who have near-equivalent trg / qualifications / positions related to “safety holding” - if there is a major accident in a commercial organisation, then corporate manslaughter could be on the charge sheet. Worse still, such an accident could close down the company.
3 Likes
Would the management and movement of articulated and rigid HGVs with and without tail lifts and also a large number of LWB vans (as well as the pedestrian staff that work around all of these) in a busy distribution centre be relevant, do you think?
Edit: just realised this isn’t the vehicle marshalling thread…
1 Like
@Cab Sir, a suggestion.
Why not make the selection of the GS and ACPS the secondary task of the newly relaunched AGSs?
Each AGS could run a quarterly ‘Scholarship Selection Weekend’ (SSW), with a pre-requisite being successful completion of the new Bronze package.
Cadets interested in the GS or ACPS would be required to attend for a weekend (or even a day if travel times permit) of grading.
Very similar to what Central & East region were running before the pause, but in this instance, the content would be standardised nationally to provide a fair and equal playing field.
Day 1 could comprise of interviews to establish a cadets interest in a flying career and written exams on Principles of Flight, Airmanship, Flying Operations and Aircraft Handling and Flying Techniques.
Day 2 would be in the simulators, flying a set of sorties assessed by the software for independence.
At the end of the weekend the scores tallied and entered into a national database of cadets waiting for either a GS or ACPS. The most suitable candidates could then be called up once a slot opens - hopefully reducing the failure rate. Again, similar to the RAF’s pilot sift - a well proven tried and tested method of selection.
Cadets graduating from a GS or ACPS would be expected to ‘give back’ by assisting at an AGS for the selection weekends.
5 Likes
This proces aligned with the current RAF pilot selection would also be a very good learning experience for those for don’t end up getting selected.
1 Like
I thought the RAF didn’t need pilots any more? Just engineers…
3 Likes
@Cab Sir, we haven’t had a single AEF allocation this year, largely due to the aircraft being used to train Ukrainian pilots. Will we see squadron allocations return to normal before the start of the ACPS, or will the ACPS simply use the Ukrainian slots when that scheme finishes?
I’m just trying to establish how ACPS can fit into an incredibly busy flying program for 6FTS?
Which Sqn?
It’s 100% the case that 6FTS output is being split between AEF, UAS and UKR. I hope you can understand why the latter has been added to the menu. Even so, ACPS is a new task being picked up by 6FTS with ‘down arrows’ elsewhere to enable it to happen. It’s a balancing act which I direct taking multiple inputs. I think the RAF is achieving amazing things from 6FTS and that includes the 1.7M 9-14 years olds they have reached out to in their STEM activities.
Of course we understand the need for UAS and UKR and that we’re at the bottom of that pile, which is why we can’t understand why you won’t let us use private clubs and their instructors to take pressure off the system. The same way the NHS allow you to use private providers because they lack capacity, the same way the Army cadets and Sea Cadets and scouts and guides can all turn up at their local BGA centre and go gliding, yet we can’t.
18 Likes
I can assure you that we (again speaking as an FI/FE) ensure that our aircraft are airworthy, that IMSAFE prior to each flight.
The last thing that we want is to put ourselves in danger let alone our students - from the career instructors to the instructors who are hour building and looking for an airline gig.
3 Likes
The pilots I’ve worked with in the past were fastidious about safety and will never take risks. One pilot I flew with one day was not happy about an engine on a Piper Cheyenne we were about to leave on when he ran up the engines at the hold point and didn’t like the sounds, cancelled the take-off and taxi’d back to the hanger and had the engineers inspect and borescope the engine. Same pilot, we were at Touat Adar in Algeria and the GPS wouldn’t feed into the nav system, much contact with engineers in the UK boxes opened, no chance of sorting the problem, and he was unwilling to fly into Africa without GPS, therefore we turned back.
Pilots do not fly unless they have very carefully considered any of the risks involved, their necks are on the line along with everybody else on the aircraft.
6 Likes
100% - I’ve just scrubbed a weeklong trip around France with a client - after a lot of to/from liasing with French ATC and Olympic Security to obtain approval and slots to fly into and out of Paris and other Olympic venues this week.
Dissapointing yes, not compromising on safety though!
5 Likes