Would it be cynical to suggest that underpinning such a choice is that having squadrons partnered with and working alongside local BGA sites, commissioning their own gliding courses from squadron funds and delivering something that 2FTS cannot do itself might highlight the failings of the VGS system and 2FTS? And accepting that would be potential be the death nail for FTS itself. It’d be like Turkey’s voting for Christmas.
But no. I’m reading too much into this. It’s about resources, staffing and costs for assuring all those BGA clubs and things. Because it’s not like CAA already provide such assurances or anything already so clubs can take people gliding…
And it’s not like the same MOD that has oversight of RAFAC, also has oversight of the Army Cadets. And they definitely don’t use civilian clubs for fun activities and getting cadets in the air or anything. Maybe, and I’m just throwing this out there, it’s because with the ACF, gliding is managed by the AT Community - who understand governance and assurance of third party providers and don’t have an empire to protect…
Which wing will not allow because they control the release of squadron funds to the civ com despite all assurances that the Squadron civ coms retain control.
Civ com… we want £500!
Wing account holder…What for!
Civ com…to arrange gliding for next week at a BGA club to go gliding.
I still laugh when thinking back to my eldest. She was about three and kept looking at the chocolate hobnobs on the table, then at the naughty step, back to the biscuits and so on. Eventually she ran over, grabbed two biscuits, somehow crammed them both in her mouth and placed herself on the naughty step.
I had to respect her then, she weighed up the consequences and decided the crime would still be worth it.
Now she’s in junior school she couldn’t care less about the step, or consequences.
I can’t get too into this discussion here, though I have had similar discussions with senior officers several times in the past 9 years about the difference between our model of providing gliding and that in, say, the Royal Canadian Air Cadets; or the SCC/CCF(RN) approach to afloat training.
With BGA stats, though, the relevant statistic is the accident rate in BGA training flights, not the overall BGA accident rate. There are some stats linked above by @Moist_Van_Lipwig. BGA accidents overwhelmingly affect owner pilots, usually solo, not training flights.
TBH I don’t think it is to do with accident rates or in fact standard of the civy pilots, as no one I am aware of has questioned that. FTS are tied to the MAA which apparently means they cant/wont go civvy, aomeone has put a copy of the RA in here so may ne worth a look over.
When VGS was not available we tried to use army gliding club but got told NO, and to answers someone elses frustration the civ comm are only allowed to spend in accordance wirh the finance manual which now excludes flying/gliding experiences (commercial getting from AtoB is different) so cant even go that route. Only way werre able to ‘help’ was ro signpost parents to army gliding club and the parents paid (very good cheap rate).
That said we are fortunately next to a VGS who have provan excellent gliding experience for our cadets., but this isnt the case for alot of units.
It is the squadrons remote from the VGS that we need to provide for.
I think we have beaten to death second guessing why FTS are holding their position (there are no MBEs involved), the only other option is to get more VGS and gliders … but I would hazard a guess that there is no money as this was spent getting the existing gliders up to standard and implementation of the VGS gliding regime.
End of the day the duty holders owns the risk and has decided that is to be kept in house, I dont see this as a reflection on individuals glidi g standards more of a systemic political issue which is out of our control and shouldnt be taken personalty.
Think if people want the actual answer then a FOI question should be submitted and see what comes back .
More momey for 2FTS resources / new gliders? Forget it.
During the pause, 2FTS wouldn’t even countenance the “seedcorn” principle of allowing VGS pilots to fly within ther BGA structure to retain currency, etc.
I refer everyone to the rider that was presented in Annex B of ACTO35 - in short, this is a private arrangement at the risk / insurance of the organisation that you will use.
We were the first sqn to do this for gliding (at the Gransdens) & shortly afetr that, ACTO35 was binned.
Use the appropriate rider = no risk by 2FTS. Whilst 6FTS are the Tutor operating authority, I suspect there has been more “risk” with the Tutor for all the aches & pains over the last 5 yrs than compared to civilian ATOs.
A sorry state of affairs. At this point the only logical conclusion for anyone on a squadron - who is getting a complete absence of communication - is that 2FTS simply don’t want cadets to fly.
Nice idea, but you somply cannot buy risk ownetship that easily, it is still a MOD RAFAC cadet in the glider of which RAFAC are still responsibility for if facilitation has been done by rafac (ATC or CCF) no matter how safe or accredited the provider is
As RAFAC have absolutely no airworthiness responsibilities and are part of the MOD organisation they use FTS to own the risk. Under the RAs FTS could contract civillian support as there is a process, this would tick the box for those who are trying with the best intention to offer a civil alternative. However the actual unassuming barrier stopping this is what seems to be the problem.
Just for info the regular forces when supplying direct aviation tasks have to follow the same process.
Just to clarify to general readers of this thread: If mr or mrs cadets parents went to a gliding club and paid the club direct with no rafac involvement then that is fine. It is only when RAFAC provide or facilitate aviation activities then the relevant RAs and FTS’s apply. Commercial passenger flights also not affected.
It’s a completely made up problem that stems entirely from the RAF’s made up and clearly unfit for purpose process, it also is inconsistently applied across the wider MoD, implying that it is very much not MAA related, and instead entirely RAF ego related.
No matter what way it’s cut, 2FTS is failing miserably at getting cadets in the air.
