If someone presents an answer to you that you think is vague or you’re sceptical about it then you are free to ask questions to clarify.
By now, a simple phone call could’ve clarified what the actual issue was?
I really do think you’re making something out of nothing with this. How much detail do you want? An infrastructure issue could be too complex to explain on an answerphone message?
The simple solution is for you to contact the AEF and ask the question or ask your wing AvO to do that on your behalf?
I’m not quite sure what there is to be cynical about?
We’ve all felt like we’ve been lied and obfuscated to about flying for long enough, so we don’t need that added to.
Are AEFs and VGS’ bearing the brunt of issues that aren’t their fault? Quite possibly.
Are they making lives easier for themselves? Probably not.
As a general principle, applicable to all activities and organisers, we the customer should not need to go scrabbling for additional information; it should be presented freely as part of the notification.
It is about the service providers understanding the customers and pre-emptively answering questions. If someone like an AEF or VGS just needs to drop a quick notification as an immediate action, they must, without further request, follow that up with a more detailed explanation to the affected parties. In this particular scenario, an email via the WAvO is probably the route for that explanation.
if you had booked a taxi to take you to the airport at 5am, and they rang up at 4.55 to tell you that they couldn’t make it because of ‘infrastructure problems’, would you be a) happy with that, and b) likely to book with them again?
i’m not taking the, and one of my children is Autistic, but are you on the ASD spectrum?
Ok, I know that’s facetious, but you’re taking this awfully personally, which is only feeding the responses you’re getting. Why’s it so hard to accept that some people have ideas for this which would improve their use of the service being provided?
I’ve not suggested that people having ideas is bad at all? You’ve got me all wrong there.
I’m not taking it personally at all. I’m just trying to break down the idea that the AEF in question has dealt with it in such a way that they’re hiding something.
All I’m advocating is a sensible approach to what at the end of the day is a minor thing…! We all make mistakes. We’re all human. A simple phone call will solve the issue.
Something I’ve thought about it, do the AEFs have to report incidents like this and who to? Then if it keeps occurring does someone do something about it?
Where is the accountability for non-delivery, if it’s not weather related? As sqns we only see our own little world and swap notes with others when we see them. I do wonder if the drawdown of the RAF and outsourcing of services is creating these problems on a more regular basis and in other AEFs, if so, someone getting well-paid needs to get all over it. If non-weather related problem comes up more than once every 3 months and if more than 2 details are cancelled in a 3 month period then someone should be shaking someone, as that is totally unacceptable as it infers something isn’t right somewhere. It has to be all about the delivery of the experience, especially when 2+ hours travelling is involved.
TBPH since the move to Wittering AEF has become somewhat farcical. While at Wyton and Teversham before that, apart from weather (and even then they pulled out all the stops), I can’t recall over 40 years so many cancellations. We are one of the get up at stupid o’clock lot to get there, so we maybe feel the effect more than those who are much closer. But still the disappointment for cadets is still there.
There is no provider / customer relationship, we are stuck with our “providers”, things are done to us and we have to be eternally grateful for the scraps we get.
Not sure if this matches the timescale, but there was an “infrastructure” issue at recently - a building roof blew off, with risk of FOD / injury until it could secured!!
Happened again!!!
This time no ATC cover!!!
The last 3 details all cancelled, accepted that one occasion was due to poor weather, but still hard telling the cadets that their plans and hopes are postponed!!
No flying for my Unit so far this year!
Without wishing to stoke up the fire, having recently worked with 5 AEF, they work tirelessly day in day out to get as many cadets flying as they can.
Most of the issues preventing cadets going flying aren’t just affecting cadets, they affect pretty much all the flying units at the station. They always push back when there is a decision made to stop flying cadets on every day that decision is made.
I understand it’s annoying when flying is cancelled but 90% of the time the AEF are not to blame.
My main frustrations are with all the promises of flying that are not fulfilled.
I presume that the contractors who provide ATC cover do not have strict conditions in their contract stating that they have to provide weekend cover or face penalties. Putting such a clause in their contract would be part of the contract negotiations, but would never be considered by the Civil Service contract staff unless it was proposed by the flying staff advising the contract staff. Why doesn’t HQAC push for such a clause?
Weather cancellation I can understand, other cancellations I cannot. I’m sure that AEF staff want to fly as much as my cadets. Everyone is being let down in some ways by the management of MoD AEF.
Rumours from a few years ago was that the issue was how the contract between the MOD and provider was for 5 days of cover, forgetting that AEF takes place mainly at weekends.
Therefore, as much as people complain, it won’t change unless some puts their hands in their pockets.
That’s what I heard when 5 AEF moved from Wyton and once set it would have needed a renegotiation and more money and staff. Given this seems to be beyond flying elite and just reinforces their complete contempt for Air Cadets doing what Air Cadets should do. This is why we should ditch this shambolic charade of MoD experience flying provision, use it for FS and do AEF at flying schools around the UK.
I would imagine that all squadrons could get cadets into an aircraft in pretty short order. God forbid that happens.
@Six_Fife I don’t doubt they feel they are, but there is little evidence to support it. Frankly I think they should be moved again to somewhere better equipped to deliver, as this move has been a complete and utter cock-up and prime example of the MoD’s inability to do the simplest thing, from start to finish and the only people to suffer have been young people joining an organisation that purports to provide flying experience and more. Just as well we can’t be held to account under trades description acts.
