I know what you said and I’m telling you that you’re wrong.
The “military influence” isn’t limited to bulling shoes and obeying orders. It’s the whole experience.
Why do you think cadets enjoy drill, shooting, fieldcraft? Why do you think cadets enjoy camp?
If the cadets themselves didn’t want the military aspect they wouldn’t be here. We frequently get those cadets whose parents want it but they don’t. They either don’t join or the leave soon after.
You have however hit the nail on the head about retention. We retain them because we offer activities and experiences which they enjoy. Certainly flying is one of them but the gliding situation is out of our hands.
What we can do is make sure we deliver the best of everything else the Corps can offer!
You seem to be quick enough to berate the senior management for not providing the tools but do you have any knowledge of the technical problems, costs, and budgetary restraints they are under?
If so perhaps you could enlighten us? I’m sure we’d all like to know.
Is it just possible that it was going to cost too much to repair a whole fleet of ageing aircraft?
Teflon, I personally moved from Scouts to the ATC for the military influence amongst other things such as the opportunities available. I’ve always had a ‘mature head on my shoulders’ as people have told me from being a young age, so at 13 the Scouts didn’t feel right for me whereas the ATC and it’s military influence felt way more ‘mature’. So, from a personal point of view, I must argue that your point doesn’t speak for some of us ex-scouts.
I like to believe that the ATC has taught me a sense of military bearing and this has done endless amounts of good for me as a person, something which I doubt I could have got from the Scouts. It’s not just polishing shoes and ironing.
PS- I am not knocking the scouts in any way shape or form, it’s truly a great organisation with it’s own pros and cons, they taught me a lot and I make sure I speak to my old scout leader if I ever see him about.
[quote=“wdimagineer2b, post:121, topic:2234, full:true”]You seem to be quick enough to berate the senior management for not providing the tools but do you have any knowledge of the technical problems, costs, and budgetary restraints they are under?
If so perhaps you could enlighten us? I’m sure we’d all like to know.
Is it just possible that it was going to cost too much to repair a whole fleet of ageing aircraft?[/quote]
I don’t know, but I do have a bit of experience regarding project management and this is what this is, a project, and one of the fundamental and key aspects of project management is communication. I accept that due to the revolving door policy in the MOD and public sector generally, communication, project management and budgetary control aren’t strong aspects.
Where has the communication been in the last 2 years to explain the sort of problems you suggest?
Why couldn’t we have been told that it’s too expensive to fix all the gliders, which is essentially what has come out in the last week. When had this been worked out? Probably by the autumn of 2014.
Why couldn’t once this has been discovered, could they not got on with getting the others fixed?
For my money if they’d said we can’t fix all the gliders, not being stupid, we’d have worked out that some VGS would go and this wouldn’t have done anything for the morale of VGS staff. So you could call it collusion to keep the status quo, knowing what the potential outcome could be. That is poor management and does nothing to instil confidence. If we had something else go wrong, could anyone say they could honestly believe a word they say?
When did the basing review become part of getting gliders fixed? All the viable gliders could have been repaired or in the process of getting fixed and sent out to VGS in batches and then later on when it becomes clear that some VGS have to go or move, you move the kit. Another scenario is we know this is coming so we won’t bother getting the gliders fixed and then once the announcement is made as to which parts of the estate are going, announce it’s too expensive to get them all fixed, which dovetails nicely with reduced numbers of VGS. Another scenario is that they were clueless from day one as to how to resolve the situation and didn’t know how to tell us anything.
Why couldn’t we have all been kept in the picture about what was going on? An all addresses email would have been sufficient at each stage of the process. They were quick enough to tell us the gliders were grounded.
To put it in a nutshell the ‘management’ have ignored the ‘Six P’ principal:
Proper Planning Prevents PXXs Poor Performance…
As Teflon states, and is obvious to the proverbial blind man riding a horse backwards, a project requires management, direction, drive, and above all communication. when the ‘pause’ was initiated a basic cost analysis would have indicated how much roughly would need to be plowed into getting the gliding fleet operational again and a basic timeline established. To take two years to get to this point would have gotten anyone in the civilian world a minimum of a [TELLING OFF] but most probably the boot! There is no excuse for the inordinate delay involved, and yes I’m talking from experience as I have been a project manager on COTS (Commercial Off The Shelf) supplies to the MOD whereby equipment (in my case communications kit and MRAP vehicles) were acquired ‘off the shelf’ from suppliers. The gliders are basically ‘off the shelf’ types and the price is negotiable if you buy more than one. Hell they may have even taken the old gliders back as ‘part-ex’ But I bet no one looked at that angle of attack…
People aren’t so naïve to put the blame at the feet of the foot soldiers.
When I get poor service from somewhere 99.9999% it is down to management failings.
The worry is that the anonymous ones are in HQAC, 2FTS and 22 Gp.
What annoys me is in 2012 there was a review which identified the future of the fleet, and identified costings.
Two years later the pause occurred and resulted in their [HQAC/2FTS/CAC/RAF/MOD] hand was forced to make those decisions and it would seem ignored their own advice, suggestions and recommendations.
just had a reply from my local MP, she said she feels strongly about how wrong the decision made by parliament and it is very upsetting. she explained she will be asking questions in parliament and she stated she has written to the minister asking the government to look again at this.
overall, this was a positive decision to contact your local MP as now we have her support
Oh no, a backbencher is going to write a letter and ask a question, bet the minister is shaking in his boots now!
Fact of the matter is if your MP is in Government they will be told to shut up by the Whips and if they are in opposition they will be ignored/palmed off with the same reply the petition received.
We need questions to be asked in Parliament.
So what if some people up the chain get egg on their faces, their lack of action has to be accounted for and them be brought to account. Just because they are officers in the armed forces doesn’t mean they can’t be called to account for their actions or in this case lack of it.
What I find intriguing is that on here at least people seem to be accepting of a plan with no time line. Go up to your manager today and say I want to start a project but I don’t no how long it will last or cost or even if it will come to fruition. Which is the political line we have been spun. We have been promised jam tomorrow when those promising it don’t know if or when there will be a delivery or even a harvest to provide the fruit to make the jam.
By now we should have been given a definite time line for this. But, should we even be in this position of waiting for a plan?
My manager with a line like this would be thinking that I’m trying it on a day early.
As I said public finances are in a parlous state, which seems to have spawned at least one more VGS (614) site being sold off and who knows where it will end. We may even find that the promised extra AEFs and or Tutors get reduced and or the gliders earmarked for repair get reduced or the idea binned altogether, if the money isn’t there.
When you think of the probable struggles our leaders’ forebears went through to give us the flying set up we have today, our current batch aren’t even worthy to be mentioned in the same breath.
Why do people think that there is a need to question decisions in parliament any time they happen to be unhappy with them?
As far as I see the organisation is under no obligation to the citizens to offer any particular opportunities or to provide any set level or type of aviation experience. they really don’t need to answer to us in how they decide to organise things or what they intend to provide.
That seems a little extreme, given that we are doing a sterling job of providing an aviation-themed experience alongside numerous other activities. While it may not stand up to every individual’s idea of how it should achieve the aims laid out in the Royal Warrant, it meets and exceeds those in the eyes of others.
There seem to be a perception of entitlement coming from certain areas of the organisation, particularly from within the ranks of the Silver Winged Master Race on Vigilants who have been rudely surprised to find out that the Organisation doesn’t revolve around them.
As it stands we have had zero gliding for two years which has had absolutely zero impact on my recruitment and retention of cadets. If we get some gliding back in an unspecified time then good as it will give my cadets a greater experience of actual flying. Until then I will continue to throw DofE and AT opportunities at my cadets to ensure that they get the best cadet experience I can provide.
I am far more concerned with the impact the negative press surrounding gliding will have on the recruitment of new cadets than i am around the actual lack of gliding. (Since not gliding has been proven over the past few years to have zero impact on my Squadron recruitment as already stated).
But I bet no one looked at that angle of attack…