Circa 10,000 flying in gliders is not too far from the mark though not necessarily how youâve done the calculation. A 5 as VGS should be outputting about 1000 GIF a year 32 GS and a handful of AGT. As I said before GIF primarily will require 2 launches so thatâs 1800-2000 launches, or up to half out of the finite resource that is the number of launches available per year. There is the engineers designated flying rate to ensure the aircraft burn rate is kept steady to maintain separation from them all needed a major at the same time. 1000 cadets divided by the number of flyable days I reckon Iâll get (87) that about 11.5 apparently weâre not allowed to cut cadets in half so task at 12.
Is the VGS world too small to fly half of 40,000 cadets â Yes â itâs tiny, three of the VGS arenât fully operational. There are only about 100 instructors there used to be 300 to 400. it should be about 17 Squadrons stronger with 100 extra aircraft distributed around the country maybe a couple in Wales few more in Scotland and one over the water
It all depends on your location too to your parent station. Although our Wing Aviation Officer is very good in how he handles requests and does a fantastic job of juggling sometimes with staff availability as usually for us its Flying Weekdays and gliding Weekends we might only get 3 slots in a month. However this month we have had 4 gliding and 3 flying slots. I will also encourage cadets to bid for as many Easter and summer camps as possible as sometimes the opportunity for flying there too.
@Cab - this really needs to be a priority. Still waiting please on any take up for a visit - although I understand that events in the ME are probably leading all agendas at the moment.
If the RAFAC clings to âno flying but RAF flyingâ and the result is that far fewer cadets get airborne for YEARS, they have failed and hammered a few bonus nails into the proverbial coffin.
The bullish clinging to RAF flying when itâs painfully obvious even to an outsider like me that a significant increase would still be poorâŚ
The RAF is incapable of providing flying for a key component of itself; the cadets.
Whilst @Cab continues to claim that we canât use civilian clubs for safety, many of us believe the real reason is that heâs wet his pants over the idea of the RAF being made to look bad by publicly admitting that theyâre incapable of providing a key cadet activity. Imagine, of course, if it became public knowledge of just how incapable our Armed Forces are.
There is zero tangible evidence to the contrary of the above belief.
Thatâs not very nice, is it?
I am doing my duty in following the direction in JSP814 and I do not currently have the capacity to assure civilian methods of delivering flying activity. Still, ACPS is awesome, I have directed more Qualified Service Pilots to join AEFs and Cmdt 6 FTS is reviewing weekend AEF activity. We are very much providing a key Air Cadet activity safely, in accordance with regulations, innovatively and in balance with the myriad commitments placed upon the Group and RAF as a whole.
Iâd be interested to see the comparative accident/fatality rates for civilian gliding clubs and the VGSâsâŚ
In fact Iâd be interested to see a comparison between the daily accident/fatality rate from before we got all excitable about going camping, and going for a Sqn walk on a Sunday morning, and afterwardsâŚ
I have seen some appalling incompetence and recklessness in the ATC, events in in which only the intervention of a particularly benevolent God could have saved lives or prevented serious injury, so Iâm by no means advocating a âjust crack onâ environment - Iâm just not convinced that the road weâve gone down, one filled with paper, has had more impact than one filled with training and experienceâŚ
Ok, Iâll ask - you donât have the resources to go around every gliding club to check stuff - thatâs fine, we understand that.
But what other mechanisms have you (22Gp) thought about to try and open up other opportunities?
If youâve looked at other ideas, other work arounds, other mechanisms, and it didnât work out, then fine - that happens in every other walk of life - but the real problem is that no one ever communicates that. No one says âwe tried this, but it didnât work for X, Y, and Z reasonsâ - all we get is ânoâ.
If the rules are the problem, has anyone thought about changing the rules? Are they perfect?
Youâll remember the âcomputer says noâ thing - well thatâs how we feel. Not great for moraleâŚ
Thatâs a disingenuous answer at best and you know it. Very few cadets get airborne anymore, to the extent that saying you âvery muchâ provide a key Air Cadet activity makes Comical Ali sound honest when he declared there were no tanks in Baghdad.
I donât imagine there would be that much bad publicity. Itâs no secret that the RAF is a shadow of its former self, and that stations have closed.
The majority donât know what theyâre looking at anyway, so likely wouldnât be able to tell or care if the picture of cadet Bloggs is at a VGS or at a BGA club.
Youâd keep the AEF stuff going to churn out more scholarships and lovely but maybe more exclusive AEF/aerobatic experience - so the âRAF Experienceâ is still the âgold standardâ.
I just donât think anyone else from an optics perspective cares enough who is flying the cadets.
So I donât think it is that. I think it is more just an ingrained attitude that only the RAF are safe operators of aircraft - despite their regular, howling, lash ups evidencing otherwise.
Surely 2FTS has spare capacity to look at due diligence now that ACPS is at AEFs? No civilian organisation(s) to assess / monitor?
What is needed to provide such capacity?
Look at the Air League - they award flying scholarships using outside providers - copy their due diligence protocols / augment as required?
It may well be but only a very few (100 per yr??) out of thousands of cadets will be awarded this. The majority will only see (at best) a smattering of AEF / VGS sorties.
Hallelujah!!
Props falling off, wrong engine power settings (oil consumption) & other significant grounding events?
Well, with respect then, is anything being done to perhaps change that? Would there, for the time being, be much we can do other than sit tight?
Clearly Air Cadets and Staff are unhappy with the arrangement, and I would imagine that the various AEFs probably donât find being stretched thin to be a very enjoyable experience, with a lack of instructors (I note, that this has been a longstanding problem and continues to be one for the wider Flying Training system) - While I wouldnât like to guess, I imagine you probably arenât happy with the current state of affairs, as it leads to you being on the receiving end of some substantial flak!
It might not be, but that is the perception that is being held. None of us want that idea to be spread. It does not reflect well on any of us. But as much as itâs not nice, that is the idea that people hold, and will continue to hold.
Much like how in some quarters we are viewed as âunreliableâ thanks to the issue of Car Parking. Fundamentally we are not winning hearts and minds in the public eye. That wouldnât matter if it werenât for the fact there sometimes seems to be no rhyme or reason for it, which gives people within the organisation that idea, right or wrong.
(I will eat my humble pie on my previous comments regarding ACPS!)
Unfortunately, ACPS isnât a fix to our present problem.
As Mike pointed out, it is out of reach of the ordinary cadet. Relatively few Cadets will likely (as much as we wish otherwise) experience ACPS and all the benefits it offers, and clearly there is a serious lack of supply regarding flying time.
Cue 1AEF suffering the ignominy of being grounded to the tune of âThe Hangar Doors fell offâ
(Disclaimer on the above: Iâve no idea how true this is, only they had to cease flying when other AEFs did not, and something about a safety inspection. How true this is, I donât know, but there was certainly a time where 1AEF ceased flying temporarily where other units didnât.)
And this is one of the problems - everyone getting their turn in a plane relies on everything running on rails. In other words, the Planes need to work, the Weather needs to be good, the Pilots need to be there in good shape, the Airfield needs to be usable, and so on and so forth.
No, but for whatever reason you do only seem to appear on here and answer questions when youâre insulted, whilst leaving other pertinent questions unanswered or giving a politicianâs answer at the very best.
With all due, this is like when the giant technology companies declare that there isnât a sound technological solution to the issue of safeguarding, and therefore there can be no safeguarding.
Youâre defining your own solution and then saying it canât be done.
There are countless organisations providing funding for young adults to get airborne in the UK, there are civilian airlines that you gladly authorise to take air cadets around the world from time to time.
While itâs the closest youâve come to an answer that isnât ânoâ, you still havenât taken the time to plainly convey the issues and interesting ways we could navigate the issue (even if there are still valid reasons for saying ânoâ).
What your people really want is to be respected and informed.
You may not have the capacity to reassure, but you have an organisation bigger than the RAF at your call (alright, most of them are cadets). Have you considered offering training to your insanely keen and very competent CFAV cohort? They could perhaps form teams and take responsibility for assuring civilian clubs to your stringent requirementsâŚ
I came up with this idea over a morning coffee. I appreciate I know little of your world, but please leverage your imaginative staff which is full of people who want to make it work. You might be blown away by their ingenuity.
Why not outsource like we have already with MFTS? Perhaps a trusted third party could carry out this assurance? For example if there was some sort of Authority for Civil Aviation or an Association for Gliding in Britain? Unfortunately neither of those organisations exist so the problem is insoluble.
Definitely respected and the ongoing Town Halls I have directed are trying to improve comms. Bear with us, we are trying!
I will use my subject matter experts (eg Central Flying School) to provide the additional assurance demanded by Policy. Where I can innovate I will (eg seeking a derogation to the Air Navigation Order to enable Air Cadets to fly solo in Tutor). I take Air Safety of children very seriously and must ensure I comply with regulation and policy in the best way I judge.
