The admin issues for AEF staff often mean delays in the start to the flying program.
With the demise of the F3822 cadets are sometimes presented with a declaration on cadet portal of a medical condition, but no evidence of that condition on an AvMED form. This is sometimes picked up when visiting staff present an activity report printed from Bader and the medical condition box is ticked.
In my experience this is a common occurrence, but the activity report is sometimes the only way to check if a cadet is enrolled/has parental consent without them accessing the app on their phone and showing you…
If you have to look at 20 phones to confirm and then you find disparity between AvMED and portal where you find yourself having to ask a cadet ‘what is the medical condition declared on portal?’
You can see where the delays/frustrations arise.
For any staff escorting cadets it is vital that the paperwork is prepared prior to the visit so that any disparity can be clarified. Particularly where there is any disparity with medical info.
Thanks for that and appreciate that you aren’t blaming those on the coal face.
Personally I don’t think it’s an aircraft availability per se but a parts shortage and although Babcock are doing the best they can with what they have it’s more than likely an issue elsewhere in the supply chain (my personal thoughts).
Manpower wise, we only have 1 permanent member of staff on our particular AEF and he’s just handed his notice in for an airline job. All our other pilots are volunteers like you and I and are all professional pilots working in industry. For us, gone are the days when we had lots of retired chaps that could fly with us a couple of times a week and those chaps we do have are not around as much during the summer months to do their day jobs.
Also, don’t forget that they get paid VA the same as everyone else so a Fg Off is paid the same as a RAFAC Fg Off. Most of our Flt Lts are time promoted so are still paid as a Fg Off plus the fact many are 40-45% tax payers just goes to show they don’t do it for the money. All we ask is that you understand that we give what we can and do what we can with the resources we have and that you do your bit to make the day run as smoothly as possible without having any disappointed cadets at the end of the day.
i cannot see this being a new issue simply based on the loss of the F3822 though?
There was still a medical declaration in the F3822 - more likely i suspect people are being more diligent simply because the information is easier to see.
isn’t that what it is there for?
How was this done with the F3822? look in the book?
I don’t understand what is different or the issue. the “book” is now the “app” so check there. you suggest the activity report is the “only” way as if that is a negative yet it is more information than was shared previously…so is a benefit for the AEF (and admin burden for the CFAV)
did you not look at 20 F3822s also?
again I do not see this as a “new” issue.
no - from what I read there is “good” use of the aircraft and pilots on the books. the issue being there is a shortage of them.
Despite efforts to build/grow the size of the Corps, it has give or take remained steady for the last 10-15 years however there as been a reduction in capability of the AEFs (even if simply not running on the weekends). the MOD contract doesn’t seem to account for the ATC/RAFAC AEF experience to accommodate the demand (which to be realistic lets set at one flight year*).
Given the volunteer nature of the pilots it is hard to magic up an extra/additional 10k flying slots so it is unlikely to ever achieve its own expectations leaving those at the coal face (CFAVs and Cadets alike - and i’ll include parents in this too) disappointed with the number of opportunities offered/avaialble.
*demand set at the level of interest could be set much higher, at 2-3+ flights a year but the RAFAC has only ever suggested one flight a year per cadet as the standard
It’s not a new issue but presents an issue when the AvMED form info suggests no medical conditions but cadet portal suggests different.
An escorting member of staff printing off the activity report form makes it easier for everybody not just AEF staff. The issue that is created is as a result of the cadet/parent declaring a medical condition. It could be something minor that doesn’t stop them flying, but without knowing what that condition is you have to ask the cadet or escorting staff if they know what that condition is? You do get cadets present AvMED forms showing no medical conditions signed by parents but when you question them about a medical condition declared on Bader it turns out to be something that should be declared on the AvMED.
If escorting staff are prepared for this then the admin gets sorted more efficiently and all the cadets get flown…
We did, but have you ever tried to get 20 cadets logged onto their cadet app? It’s much quicker to check 20 F3822’s than 20 phones….
All they have to do is pay to convert my licence and I am on board!
[thread drift]on this subject, how many VGS pilots who have stepped away following the loss of the VGS numbers, having been invited to apply, were actually accepted? I know of one who looked into applying but for whatever reason never did[/thread drift]
i think you mean requirement for RAF pilot - this is what restricted me applying.
being asthmatic i cannot even join the RAF let alone be a pilot and so will never reach the requirement levels despite being a successful PPL holder and aircraft operator. (I offer “AEF” experiences to friends, with the “£100 burger” lunch option, yet deemed “medically unfit” to do the same in service aircraft)
The medical condition indicator on an SMS event highlights that there is a medical condition on their record that would have been entered after being noted on a 3822H. However, there are endless medical conditions that can be declared that are completely unrelated to the questions on the AV Med 1 form - it sounds like there is an accusation that there is a lie on the AV Med 1 if the medical indicator is next to their name on the event with nothing on the AV Med 1 - this is really not true - it just means that the medical condition is something else that wouldn’t preclude flying!
this is a good point.
Something as basic as “Hayfever sufferer” would be listed on a Cadets records yet there is no where on the AV Med Form 1 to capture this…and hence the “discrepancy” exists…
No issues today with the Av Med forms or the one F6424 - very efficient CGS staff had the briefing done, egress training complete for my 4 cadets, out on the airfield, & first one airborne in an hour!
I’m not suggesting anyone would lie on a medical declaration form, but I have had occasions when all the ‘no’ boxes on the form have been ticked, potentially by a parent rushing to complete the form and when cross checked with info on Bader a ‘no’ box shouldn’t have been ticked.
I am aware of at least one occasion where this (a no declaration of a medical condition) led to an incident in flight when a cadets condition manifested in a panic attack.
Some might say the wise thing to do would be to remove the med tick box field from the activity report on Bader for flying/gliding?
Also, even if the event says consent forms are not required - TG23’s are required for every event - so if there is a marker next to a name, there should be TG23(s) with the accompanying staff to view.
