Sorry if I offended, but there are a lot of reasons quoted on this forum for NOT doing things. The RAF is probably spring loaded to obey a rule rather than to see if there is a better way. I suppose the Air Force Act does not encourage thinking outside the box.
However, I essentially stand by my point that it is not the aircraft that are the problem, it is the inappropriate rules that have been applied. I am perfectly willing to reconsider this stand should someone explain what is actually wrong with the aircraft that has kept them nailed to the ground for 2 years. They may have trouble with this.
The manufacturer have said, âwe werenât asked if these mods are safe for the airframe therefore we donât support them as we havenât seen the work or standards appliedâ. Hence the panic.
Staffs were clearly keen to hear about the glider recoveryâŚas are you all and I can only apologise that the formal announcement of the recovery programme has been delayed, yet again, due to circumstances beyond my control. All the information is now to hand and we just await final Ministerial clearance to tell everyone what will happen in the VGS community over the coming 18 months or so. Rest assured that gliding will be retained as a core element of the air cadet syllabus but it is still going to take some time to recover sufficient airframes to see large numbers of cadets gliding. But it it will happenâŚ
so we can expect another year or more before we see any real âin houseâ gliding opportunities available for Cadets, with Christmas 2017 before we can expect âfull recoveryâ???
3.5 years to sort out the drama, that is longer than the average Cadet service!
I feel very let down by this organisation and Iâm am surprised no one has pushed this for more media coverage. I know some people are trying their hardest to get us some of our USP, but frankly I wouldnât even think incompetence as a word does justice to this utter debacle.
This is, in my opinion, a crisis moment for our organisation. Poor management, poor morale, lack of opportunities has already started leading to cadets leaving at a time we should be celebrating our 75th anniversary and expanding.
Were it not for my friendship circle I fear I would have left a long time ago as this âpauseâ combined with other areas of life has made my hobby onerous, and a chore. I have no doubt that we will struggle for years to come with the reputational loss this will have caused us amongst volunteers and cadets.
By which time, I suspect many squadrons will be organising their own flying rather successfully through the use of their Local BGA Clubs and CAA Flying Schools!
Which will again not be allowed once we have an in house glider fleet, as the rules where slacked due to the fact that not many air cadets fly at the moment and Aef cannot fill the hole left by no GIC
But with the closures of various different airfields throughout the country surely itâs inevitable that private flying will become a much bigger part of ATC flying?
Certainly for the North, with Linton on Ouse and Topcliffe set to go, once basic fast jet training moves from Tucanos at Linton onto Texanâs at Valley, There will be very little infrastructure left to accomodate the VGS!
Who said the sites are being sold off? Just because an airfield is closing as a full time flying base doesnât mean it wonât remain part of the MOD estate and allow VGS operations.
As for the MAA bashing, it has made operating any aircraft in the military more complicated and frustrating (whether military or G-registered - the Tutor fleet hasnât been excempt from MAA induced groundings has it?). Sadly the military safety culture was not sufficiently robust, and it has to be taken seriously whether it involves the two (well paid) blokes in a GR4 or a VGS staff cadet and a wee 13 year old in the front. I do agree this has taken rather a long time though, and maybe now was the time for a fleet replacement that may have been quicker and cheaper!
Schleicher have already told the ATC to sling their hook back when they were looking for Glass 2 seaters, I doubt very much that Schleicherâs view on such an order has changed.
DG have their DG1001 Club, but at C.A ÂŁ120,000 per airframe, Iâd probably say thats a non starter.
PZL have the Perkoz, which depending on spec can be picked up for about ÂŁ65k without tips. but spins very well.
Not much else in terms of 2 seat training gliders on the market Iâm afraid.
Looking at the palaver of unknown repair schedule & more importantly, the unknown number of gliders that can be repaired, I would hope that there is a Plan B on the shelf for the possibility of requiring some new airframes. However, on the basis that Plan A doesnât seem have any solid grounds, Iâm not holding my breath
I think that most people are aware that the process ainât that easy.
However, from when the âpauseâ started, someone, somewhere in the âwe are looking at the issueâ team should have been considering the âwhat if repairs are not practical or too expensiveâ option. That would have directed some effort into seeking input from manufacturers to assess the viability/pricing/timescale.
Say there was a 2 yr lead time for boosting manufacturing capacity - had someone said âgoâ 2 yrs ago, we would be looking at new gliders (albeit at a trickle feed). Currently we have very few flyable airframes, no contractor with suitable capacity (reliant on a planning application) & no known timescale for any fix.
That would require insight and a âthink outside the boxâ mentality, something that none of the people we have lodged in Cranwell and other parts of the management structure have. If they did then the things you mention would have happened.
As has been said before if the ATC was a commercial operation run by the sort of blinkered, heads up their own backsides and unimaginative types we have, weâd all have been doing something else with our time by now. To start saying that 21 or so months after the gliders were grounded that getting them fixed is now linked to / part of a defence review shows just how p!$$ poorly this has been handled. Frankly everyone involved in this should have had their P45 a long time ago, not gold plated jobs they are welded into. Do they not have performance reviews? Or is it done over a pint/glass of wine in the mess?
We have been dripfed lies and fabrication to keep us hopeful of a return in 2015 and then 2016, which now looks more like 2018 or later.
PEP your description of this is spot on and probably about as strong as it can get on the interweb. I bet the line, in most staff rooms (if it like ours) is somewhat more industrial.
They should all be completely and thoroughly ashamed by the way they have let down several generations of cadets to this point and beyond. But as long as they are collecting nice salaries, theyâre not earning them by any stretch, everythingâs rosy.
Iâm not sure that replacement of the Vikings is in any way necessary. Two seat gliders have very long. There is no real reason why they shouldnât last many decades (unless, of course, the MAA put an unnecessary safe life on them) There are many Ka13s still doing good service after 40 years and the Ka21s are not far behind.
The Vigilants are a different matter. There are no replacement engines, so that problem has to be faced soon. A re-engining program is very expensive and probably not worth it. There is much talk of a new instrument package which completely misses the point that all you need for ab initio training is an ASI, Altimeter, Vario and clean canopy.
The truth is that the Grob 109 is out of date, not only its incredibly out of date engine design, but also its design concept. They were always intended as a way of getting a touring light aircraft out the the old âRedhill Definitionâ of what was a motor glider. There are many very modern light aircraft that do that job much better.
Having instructed in a number of motor glider types, my opinion is that as an A to B cheap aircraft in the 80s it was great, as a gliding trainer it was not much good; too big and too heavy.
Perhaps the answer should be keep the Vikings and gradually phase out the Vigilants replacing them with conventional gliders as they go. A mixed fleet is no problem; most gliding clubs have several types of two seater in their fleets without problems.
An eventual withdrawal of the Vigilant fleet could be tempered with an expanded AEF fleet following the draw down of Tutor EFT use over the next 2-3 years. Keep gliding to pure gliding, not SLMG, and offer greater AEF capacity.
