It wouldn’t be so bad IF there was some common sense in terms of where people can go and or do, so as to ease the pressure that is associated with people being cooped up.
The problems began when a list of supposed essential and non-essential things was drawn up. These differ according to people and circumstance. I can imagine new toys and things to do are essential to people with children and non essential to people like us with grown children no longer at home.
We’ve had Sovietesque queueing outside shops & banks for the last few weeks and restrictions on numbers inside, although my experience has been queues are long, but get inside and it’s business as usual. So why this couldn’t applied to say leisure activities alludes me. This at least would ease some of the financial problems for businesses and those that go with being cooped up with your nearest and dearest for weeks on end. Our local pool used to have different coloured bands for locker numbers and I recall in the summer of '76 restricted the time you had in the pool depending on the colour of the band.
There are ways and means to work around things, but that takes some imagination.
Because it’s not just about preventing the spread of the virus.
All activities carry a degree of risk. As more people do these activities, the chances of something going pear shaped to goes up (I think? Obviously same individual likelihood, but more individuals). This then puts extra pressure on the emergency services, and whatever hospital has to deal with it, at a time when they don’t have the capacity to cope with it.
Same goes for driving your car to go for a walk - increases risk of a car crash (if you’re not driving, the risk is dependent on where you park).
There’s a big difference between this pandemic and the hot summer of ‘76.
Yes, I remember it, and restricting numbers in a swimming pool would have been enforced because everyone wanted to stay in the pool due to the heat; and there were no issues of ‘social distancing’.
But this has seen messages about not doing things like DIY, going to the allotment or even gardening, all well and good but then don’t complain about people just sitting indoors, watching TV, drinking, eating, reading etc etc. We used to enjoy watching medical dramas, (the only one we watch now is Doc Martin) but as soon as you saw someone up a ladder and or using any sort of tool you just knew they’d hurt themselves to kick start a storyline. It was almost like watching Star Trek and deciding which one was going to die.
Protect the NHS? What about protecting people’s mental state?
I’ve been lucky and been going to work so get out of the house every couple of days, but my wife hasn’t gone out bar a couple of walks, since this kicked in. She’s been doing things indoors and now the house is the cleanest it’s ever been. When I’ve been at home as I’ve said I spend as much time in the garden, garage or shed and in doing so defying the advice using tools and step ladders.
As a species the idea of just sitting inside doing not a lot has been used as a punishment for millennia and this feels like a punishment.
Isnt it just that the society that now exists is completely risk adverse.Every risk must be eliminated .Thing is in real life you cant do that.
Im now reading today that doctors are complaining that as the NHS has been totally focussed on CV19 other people are dying due to not going to A and E till its too late and or having their surgery/treatment delayed.
Sooner rather than later someone in power is going to have to make the call to relax these restrictions.If not the economy is going to sink like a stone and then who will pay for everything?
The problem with that analysis is that it’s dealing with the comparative risks of doing something Vs not doing something - although it’s not really: you’ve not, for example, looked at the epidemiological risk of 5m people going shopping every week Vs the malnutrition risk of 5m people not going shopping every week - the risks revolving around exercise aren’t based on a zero risk baseline: there are health, MH, immunity risks in staying at home and doing no outdoor exercise/activity, there are car accident risks in driving to a location to take exercise, and there are very obvious epidemiological risks in lots of people going to fewer locations - while the transmission of virus in person to person contact might be minimal in both settings, if 1000 people go into a park in 8 hours there’ll be transmission galore on every surface like gates, seats, park furniture and some person to person transfer at choke points like entrances and exists - if only 500 go to that location, and the other 500 go out into a wide area of fields, forests, and moorland, then both the person-surface-person transmission, and the person-person transmission will be significantly reduced.
The price of that is not likely to be lots of serious traffic collisions, but a couple of prangs.
When activities do resume how long will it take AEFs and VGSs to take to the air once again? I fear for an even longer pause as flying instructors won’t have been practicing their flying skills and may need to refresh
Same with Shooting how long to get everyone a WHT on all the different Weapons.
A loooooong time I suspect.
They’ve been asked to consider extending WHT’s and have point blank said no.
They could at least extend the WI’s and SAAI’s just so we have people to deliver tests!
Just expedite reauthorisation of SATT instructors by those with non-expiring qualifications, then roll out cascade retesting as a matter of urgency.
Well, a matter of urgency that reflects how infrequently most people actually need to use the skills in normal cadet life.
Hmmm; perhaps by the time we do get back to normal, we can have an L144 that is usable below 25m and doesn’t fall apart during careful handling.
Call in SASC?
Dream on - haven’t seen one yet, let alone been WHT’d / fired one!
One well organised weekend? 
An oxymoron for this organisation 
this has been discussed in my flying club, or at least emails sent out.
words along the lines of
Although recognised that members will want to hire the club aircraft again, taking such a long break (for many they haven’t got a logbook entry for 2020) would require a “check flight” with instructor - but first the instructors need to be current and then have sufficient minimum hours to take a student.
i am sure it would be similar for AEF and VGS.
everyone needs to get in an aircraft and be checked over, build up their solo hours to have the minimum in the last 30/90 days as required then have sufficient numbers to be offering a flying program.
of course all of this is dependant on the maintenance. by rights aircraft should have be hibernating in hangers with certain “long term” storage practices conducted. so it will take the ground crews “time” to bring the aircraft back to a state the engines can even be switched back on.
ok so this may only be an hours work/aircraft but all adds to the delays.
then we have the weather to consider…
if, IF we come back on 1st September, lets say it takes 2-3 weeks to get up and running again (probably longer for the VGS as their is no operations for the pilots/ground crew M-F) we’re then into October where the weather becomes more of an influencing factor…
At the risk of sounding a bit unreasonable…
Is there any reason why AEFs can’t deliver cadet flying from September the first?
The whole point of having VR(T) pilots is so they remained part of the RAF. The RAF are still flying routine training sorties. So why can’t the AEFs?
The Admin side could all be done via CP and Teams, so with the caveat that any slots might be cancelled, why not allocated and plan for a start on the 1/9?
At the elementary level?
Taken from another forum at the end of March:
Given that UAS’ are off, and that EFT is only delivered in one location, AEF flying doesn’t fit into essential training, so won’t be continued.
This is an interesting point.
I would agree that AEF isn’t essential - I have no issues with them not flying cadets during this period.
But maintaining RAF aircrew at minimum currency? Why can’t AEF (and UAS, for that matter) pilots nip along once a week and spent an hour pootling around the skies to maintain currency?
Yes, you could argue that flying should be cut to the bare bones to protect crews, ground staff etc. But then why are routine, pre planned sorties going ahead, instead of in a sim, or just waiting a few weeks?
Because despite protests otherwise, they’re not really RAF.
They’re part timers who will have mingled with muggles and therefore could be contaminated, and also risk contaminating the aircraft, not to mention all the people they’ll come into contact with on the station.
It’s not worth the risk or expense.
The RAF is going ahead with training because they actually matter.