That’s 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.
2 Likes
I’d be interested to see the comparative accident/fatality rates for civilian gliding clubs and the VGS’s…
In fact I’d 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 afterwards…
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 I’m by no means advocating a ‘just crack on’ environment - I’m just not convinced that the road we’ve gone down, one filled with paper, has had more impact than one filled with training and experience…
7 Likes
Ok, I’ll ask - you don’t have the resources to go around every gliding club to check stuff - that’s fine, we understand that.
But what other mechanisms have you (22Gp) thought about to try and open up other opportunities?
If you’ve looked at other ideas, other work arounds, other mechanisms, and it didn’t 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 ‘we tried this, but it didn’t work for X, Y, and Z reasons’ - all we get is ‘no’.
If the rules are the problem, has anyone thought about changing the rules? Are they perfect?
You’ll remember the ‘computer says no’ thing - well that’s how we feel. Not great for morale…
4 Likes
That’s a disingenuous answer at best and you know it. Very few cadets get airborne anymore, to the extent that saying you “very much” provide a key Air Cadet activity makes Comical Ali sound honest when he declared there were no tanks in Baghdad.
6 Likes
I don’t imagine there would be that much bad publicity. It’s no secret that the RAF is a shadow of its former self, and that stations have closed.
The majority don’t know what they’re looking at anyway, so likely wouldn’t be able to tell or care if the picture of cadet Bloggs is at a VGS or at a BGA club.
You’d keep the AEF stuff going to churn out more scholarships and lovely but maybe more exclusive AEF/aerobatic experience - so the “RAF Experience” is still the “gold standard”.
I just don’t think anyone else from an optics perspective cares enough who is flying the cadets.
So I don’t 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.
7 Likes
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?
7 Likes
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 don’t 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 wouldn’t like to guess, I imagine you probably aren’t 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 it’s not nice, that is the idea that people hold, and will continue to hold.
Much like how in some quarters we are viewed as “unreliable” thanks to the issue of Car Parking. Fundamentally we are not winning hearts and minds in the public eye. That wouldn’t matter if it weren’t 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 isn’t 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 “The Hangar Doors fell off”
(Disclaimer on the above: I’ve 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 don’t know, but there was certainly a time where 1AEF ceased flying temporarily where other units didn’t.)
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 you’re insulted, whilst leaving other pertinent questions unanswered or giving a politician’s answer at the very best.
4 Likes
I would remind people of our AUP and not to post solely with the intention of abusing other users.
3 Likes
With all due, this is like when the giant technology companies declare that there isn’t a sound technological solution to the issue of safeguarding, and therefore there can be no safeguarding.
You’re defining your own solution and then saying it can’t 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 it’s the closest you’ve come to an answer that isn’t “no”, you still haven’t 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 “no”).
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 requirements…
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.
8 Likes
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.
4 Likes
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.
That’s simply not good enough and I am directed to apply additional assurance. I do this using my SQEP SMEs.
Not even close to substantial flak but thanks for the recognition that some folk offer their opinions in a way which is not respectful.
I sleep easy as I am doing my utmost to secure the right resources and outcomes for the Air Cadets. I have had a useful intro meeting with the new Cmdt and I assure you everything is up for challenge and change as long as the resources are available and our output is demonstrably safe (ALARP and Tolerable).
We will fly approx 11500 cadets this FY and you will have seen how I am trying to increase this number. Civ means is not the answer. I want RAF Air Cadets to fly from RAF locations and / or in RAF aircraft and / or with RAF pilots. I absolutely understand how this isn’t a view shared by some and I respect that. But the link to the RAF is important and I will sustain it as much as possible. Sustainment of Tutor and Viking is central to the AEF offer. Be careful of considering alternatives eg removing both types in favour of funding flying at civ locations. This is not a future I want nor do I think it is a better future for RAFAC.
I get why RAF does not want to blanket authorise flights at any flying school/ ato / dto. Just because they are regulated doesn’t mean they are compliant. You look at some with fleets of utter ****box Cessnas with limited to day VFR only, and you wonder how they fly! As a professional pilot I can make an informed decision as to what/when I fly (as can any license holder), but cadets / parents / your average squadron staff can’t.
This is why I liked the acto35 process - it authorised pilot and aircraft together on a case-by-case basis. It also set minimum for experience (possibly for aircraft too, I can’t remember!)
@Cab are we able to consider headcount at 6FTS to do any of:
Approvals under a re-vamped acto35 process?
Pilot check outs (at pilots expense) in their aircraft?
Aircraft engineering inspections?
You could also limit flights to airfields with full ATC only to further reduce risk?
Yes, it won’t benefit majority of cadets, but where you have CFAVs with the right licence / aircraft it can make awesome stuff happen.
1 Like
I am already working with colleagues to improve 6 FTS pilot numbers.
2 Likes
I think most of us would disagree; it has to be - at least in part. Civilian means has to be part of an overall solution which has an outcome of every cadet getting an opportunity to fly once a year; anything less is failing to deliver our USP. There is no way you are trebling your flying output to ensure every cadet gets one flight per year unless someone appears with a magic money tree and decides to build a load of more local RAF bases. Any work done to increase the RAF provided aspect is obviously appreciated and everyone would agree that link should be paramount - but not at the expense of getting kids in the air.
4 Likes
Yet there is evidence of our ACF cousins making the most of these civilian club opportunities - given the “JS” in JSP stands for “joint service” i have always believed this is a policy which all forces (Navy, Army, Air Force) all comply with?
i don’t think we’re questioning the what is being provided, or arguing its safety or accordance with expectations (regs and policy).
what we are arguing is the capacity has fallen off a cliff with no sign that former capacity will recover - constantly “jam tomorrow”
so do we [CFAVs] but the capacity doesn’t allow for anything close to a sensible expectation - even if there are 11500 this FY, that is only ~20-25% of the Cadet population - and that is not an equally distributed 25% either nationally or across the board (ie 25% of the population ≠ 25% of every Wing or 25% every Squadron)
It was only 10 years ago when considering the VGS fleet the policy which indicated Cadets should expect one flight a year (ACTO 11(Ver9.0) - Annex A) was influential in what the future VGS fleet might look like.
10 years on we cannot manage 1 flight every other year today given the average length of service of a Cadet is ~2 years, the vast majority join the world’s most prestigious flying club’s (ie RAF) sponsored youth organization (RAFAC) and and less than 25% chance of getting a flight
3 Likes
I’m just going to link these two posts…
If you lose from the RAF side you will never get it back & then the civvy side will rinse you.
May also be worth checking if Ascent have an exclusivity clause before pushing for civilian providers (think of it like MT & clarity/Phoenix & the faff that causes when we could just go direct to the local enterprise down the road)
1 Like
In jest obviously but I have over 4500hrs virtual flying in various aircraft if you need any pilots. Happy to chuck a suit on 
1 Like