Yes - me! I spoke to him by phone, and the gist of his reply was that he didn’t agree with the use of military force, and he considered that cadet units glorified the use of force to children. To that end, he would refuse any and all requests for time off to attend cadet events. We still had cadets show up to things, it just went on their record as unauthorised. Which is fine if they’re generally good attendees, but if they’re sailing close to the wind, it could cause issues.
And I could say the same about the issues with our local AEF, and yet…
I don’t disagree with that thought process, but as a squadron commander, I can’t speak on behalf of AEFs/VGSs. You may offer the use of a quiet room when the cadets show up, but I can’t guarantee that to concerned parents. Nor can I guarantee that availibilty of resources to assist them, staff to help them, or that their sons/daughters won’t just ignore the books, and chat to their mates instead.
Commercial organisations - money talks - if you could guarantee XX cadets for YY days per month on a regular (paid) basis, pilots / aircraft would be available.
I would suggest that it would be; look at all the FTS / VGS hierarchy / personnel / infra-structure / property (land & aircraft) / maintenance / safety & oversight / administration requirements (not an exhaustive list). I bet you that if you could cost it all out, the hourly rate (or specific number of glider launches) under the current system would be significantly greater than the equivalent of any commercial organisations.
And if you approached a commercial organisation, they would factor all those costs in and pass it on to the customer.
Any commercial organisation would look at current costs and submit bids in a tender process in an attempt to undercut other bidders?
I might suggest what you could end up with is not what you might expect, or even worse than we have now?
I don’t know, I’m just guessing like you? So who’s right?
At the moment we have a system that has gone through a great eat deal over the last few years. What it does offer is safe enjoyable Flying and gliding at a known standard. The standard provided is good and second to none, respected around the world, standardised by Central Flying School. I believe that is worth protecting and defending because if it goes, cadets won’t get anything like what they’re getting now.
Some on here appear to wish it’s demise? Everything has issues and faults so be careful what you wish for?
I’m afraid at the moment, it’s basically already died. Gliding hasn’t properly happened for at least 3 years, and I can’t remember the last time we had a successful AEF sortie.
As much as I hate to say it, it’s about time we stopped kidding ourselves. The organisation can’t afford to deliver the sort of experiences we were used to in the past and it will never get to that level again.
The best option I can see is to cut our internal options and outsource. Failing that, let us outsource anyway. I had a brilliant scheme set up with a gliding club that has been stopped for no decent reason, all in the name of “safety”. What it actually amounts to is people higher up in the organisation being risk averse and not wanting to dilute their own empires.
If we allowed more use of BGA sites or private clubs, we’d alleviate a lot of the pressure on the current system and free up more space for others.
Let’s not get personal. I honestly don’t believe any blame lies at the feet of either VGS, AEF or squadron staff but rather decisions taken on our behalf by people above us.
Very true - but I would speculate that these costs would be much less than the equivalent system that we use now.
Standardisation / quality - that is a different argument entirely but not an insurmountable issue. Of course, you need to actually carry out gliding in order to effect standardisation…
On the safety argument, CAA / BGS facilities have similar approval / oversight, but it is considered “necessary” to add on the military oversight - protectionism or safety?
For every person on here stating they can’t remember having a successful AEF visit there are many, many more who will say they have.
Some AEFs have had their problems, not self inflicted.
Gliding is starting to recover, accepted it won’t be what it was.
Safety is the key factor here. Outsourcing Flying and gliding is something the RAF is very twitchy about. There is no appetite to put any cadet at risk and outsourcing increases the potential for something to happen due to reduced oversight. That’s how they think and I don’t think that will change greatly?
The RAF is happy for the kids to play in its garden, but not in the neighbours. They look at cadets as ‘precious cargo’ so good luck with any suggestion the neighbours garden is a good place to go.
An AEF flight has a standard of aircraft, safety equipment, ground support, flight supervision, pilot competency and standardisation that no UK light aircraft operation can match. That is not cheap and it is delivered because the cost is absorbed in with the UAS and other core military tasking and infrastructure. The aim is to deliver safe and enjoyable experience of flying in the military environment, mass outsourcing would never be considered IMHO.
Ps - I spent most of my youth years sitting in a crew room desperate and grateful for the odd 30 minute flight (but then again I was probably a total avgeek before the term was invented )
You did and it has been discussed at a higher level and deemed not viable.
Unfortunately I am unable to discuss the reasons on here but what you may think as a simple solution isn’t really a viable one when looked into… and we have looked into all options.
I understand that thinking if you’re looking at a one off person who owns their own aircraft, but BGA and private schools still have to meet rigid criteria to fly. At the end of the day, why would any pilot deliberately endanger themselves let alone someone else.
Accidents happen, I know that. I’d like to minimise them as far as reasonably practical, but simply banning something isn’t reasonably practical, and nor is imposing overly arduous criteria on something which in effect makes it impossible.
Wasn’t suggesting anything different, was trying to explain that you don’t get any extra pay or allowance for doing it. Was a service instructor for over 14 years so I knowhow much you guys give up to get the cadets in the air, some on here have no idea.
sigh … as you asked i happen to be an OC of a sqn with 127 cadets, average parade strength of 90. Have a excellent staff and senior cadet team. We are active on all core activities on offer. We go on expeds in the UK and overseas. We fundraise a huge amount for local charities and ourselves. We have 2 minibuses and 2 landrovers on unit. So in answer to your “comment” yes I am an OC at the coalface and not in an ivory tower, and nor do i wish to be in such a place … if such a place actually exists. My team and I are positive in our outlook, the glass is always full. We do get frustrated with paperwork and process but for the sake of the cadets we adapt and overcome and move forward. Hope that answers your question … and yes we are an ATC squadron not a CCF private school.
The main sticking point may be that the current aircraft and support contract is in place until 2022 or 23. In a year or two as the final Tutor EFT winds down that will solely be for the provision of UAS and AEF. Hard to see any change before then. I did see work on the post Tutor a AEF model a few years ago, potentially being quite different (and significantly cheaper by using a far less capable aircraft), but I don’t know where that’s going long term.
)