RAF Air Working Group

[Sharpe]

All,
For those not aware, there was a RAF Air Executive Committee meeting called last night. It was only short, and I plan to give you all a short and sweet briefing on the key points after the flight on Thursday.

It has been agreed that there needs to be a body within RAF Air that has a specific remit to challenge, influence and orchestrate change/direction of travel for RAF Air now that we are getting rather large in terms of numbers of Sqns and pilots (and even simulation options - our bad ).

As I understand it, this body will have Richard as president, and will elect a chairman from within the group as one of its first actions. There will be a core team of 2-3 core people to support Richard in agreeing and executing new plans (I expect Neil may be one, others will likely be elected from within the group). A member representing the following aircraft/sqns (A10, F14, F16, FA18/OCU, AV8B) will also be present when this 'working group' meets, but to voice the needs/desires of each Sqn and to help debate and influence the direction of RAF Air rather than actually 'steer the ship'. This will include some issues less close to home for us at the moment (Tuesday night DCS missions and harmony) but some that are (RAF Airs direction of travel, ensuring that 'hard core' and 'soft core' pilots can both comfortably call RAF Air home and potential generation of SOPs and so on). This group may also nominate/victimise/utilise specific people to help execute specific tasks, placing those people in the working group on a limited time basis while they execute the task.

3(F) Sqn has been requested to be present within this group, which says a lot about RAF Airs desire to continue to provide us with a community to call home, whether we stay with BMS indefinitely, move back to DCS in 6 months or anything that sits in between. All sqns are electing/voting a pilot to represent each sqn, and we need to do the same thing.

While it seems that the Sqn bosses are the ones taking these roles, I wish to put it to the sqn so that if anyone does feel like they would like to take on this role, they can feel free to put their name forward (then the sqn will vote on who). There is absolutely no reason why it has to be me and couldn't be any one of you instead - so I put it out there to you guys.

Please express your views below. If you would like to nominate (victimise) someone please put their name down, if you wish to put your own name forward, please do so. If you prefer that I take the role as part of my 'sqn cdr' role, please say. I would add that there seems to be a genuine desire to influence change, but that pilots taking this role should take it on willing to devote the required time to it (which I dont think will be particularly onerous per say).

-S

[Danny]

I'd like to hear the points of the meeting before I make a call, been down the "working group" road before.

Will it be on TS and what time on Thursday?

Cheers

[Sharpe]

Hi Danny,
It was going to be after the mission but I am happy to give you a separate brieif - although the post above covers about 75% of it as it turns out.

If your free tonight around 1900 we can meet on TS before the mission?

-S

[Beanie]

I don’t want to add to sharpe’s already full plate but you do seem to have a handle on all this already.

[Merlin]

It certainly sounds like the intent is genuine and I am encouraged that the leadership still wish to engage with us and (as you say Sharpe) continue to give us a home and a community to be a part of.

I’m happy to voice my desire to return to DCS when we consider it a more viable platform for the training we’re doing in BMS, so maintaining our patch within RAF Air makes sense.

As to who, I’m afraid I’m not willing to put my name forward, I am very time limited and have family commitments that I cannot shirk.

No desire to throw anyone under the bus in terms of nominating anyone.

[maggsy]

To coin a phrase I will try not too flog this particular dead horse too hard, but any changes have to be desired/embraced by all involved. It is not good enough to just pay lip service to those who are drifting away from RAF Air, with some half hearted "look we are going to look at making changes" Over the last 12 months we have seen several members bring new ideas, missions even fully dynamic campaigns to the table and one by one these ideas etc have been left to hang and die from a lack of support, negative feedback, lack of commitment across the board. The net result is the new ideas and missions are stifled and the same old missions are recycled over and over again.

The definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing over and over, and then expecting different results

Relying on "it's the way we have done since granny was a boy" might not be the right approach in fact I will be as bold as to say it could well be the root of the problem. Sticking with tried and tested is one thing, burying our heads in the sand is a different perspective of the same action, depending on how your viewing it.

Here comes the hard bit, 3(F) Squadron wish to train to higher level than the bearest minimum, this includes utilising the F-16 to its fullest, the current DCS version cannot fulfil that remit, the limited functions it can do mean flying in the current default missions with 3(F) Sqd tasks that were just slapped on as a token gesture. They were fun the first time, but the second third etc they became redundant as a training tool they were not even good entertainment once you have flown it numerous times, coupled with the DCS F-16 limited functionality reduced the capacity to practice varied approaches to a particular task, flying the same old tired profile week after week after week does not hold any joy for me, and I suspect for many others. I think far too much emphasis is placed upon what 3 Sqd is or is not doing from other squadrons, if you wish to replay the same style of flight week in and week out then please do not be upset or bemused if you find if other squadrons choose to organise something different.

Keep Calm and Carry On

Just to add a response , I am not quitting and I with hand on heart can say I am the most ardent supporter of us all flying multi squadron DCS missions on Raf Air nights.. I am desperate to bring the skills we are learning back to DCS, but my honest opinion is that the DCS F-16 does not allow us to give our best and this without doubt is part of the frustration . However ED will at sometime get the F-16 somewhere close to being the platform we wish to fly and the mission planners can throw us some hefty challenges which we have a realistic chance of achieving, so fingers crossed and please be patient we are doing what we can to make us better ...not to distance ourselves from the group that makes us so welcome.

[Neil Willis]

That is exactly why we want to make effective changes Maggsy.

We know things have stagnated terribly, and we need Squadrons to tell us what to do. Get onboard, and push through what you want, rather than us rehashing everything ad nauseum.

I seriously want everyone to push hard for what they want.

I believe we may be able to provide a separate server for every Squadron going forwards after we lost our current provider, we have secured a far better one which will still remain free of charge too.

Neil

[Flyco]

Maggsy, your criticism about the hackneyed missions that we run (too often) is justified - I should know I wrote some of them. Like you, I am getting sick of them , and I feel that it is largely the quality of our multi-type missions that is letting the side down.

I hope you will have seen that I was pushing quite hard for one of the results of the recent meeting be to that we should seek inputs as to what we want for future missions. I believe that the only way we can do that is to solicit ideas, from all users, build missions to try to meet those members' wishes, and then evolve them in response to their reactions to those missions. Why not get involved, if not as part of a formal working group then as a mission maker, in your own right?

I have recently started on a new mission, centred on the recent increased interest in the Huey. However, I am a bit of a plodder and I lack the creative inventiveness to come up with different ideas. I also try to fly all the aircraft roles in my missions, as I develop them, but, with 6 or 8 different ac now available, I am unable to cover the whole gamut effectively. I need better pilots with newer ideas to help. I will gladly program the actual missions if I can get help with the creative side.

What I am saying is don't quit - stay with us and help kick some arses! I agree with almost everything you have said.

[Richard Rodgers]

Guys,

This is the sort of candid talk that we need within each squadron, not just 3 as to what you want, or dare I say need, to see going forward.

Please be aware that as with all committees the sitting members can be rather fluid so just because 'X' pilot chucks his hat in there now doesn't mean that we don't have pilot 'Z' on there in two months time. Yes there should be a great degree on continuity, but fresh eyes bring fresh ideas.

Steve, I totally agree with your feelings that BMS is giving you guys the required vehicle to get your training done to the level that you feel you need. If that works for you all whilst DCS is not up to the task, then stick with it. Unfortunately even God doesn't know when DCS systems will be good enough to allow the F16 & DCS World to function correctly so we do not know when/if 3 Sqn are likely to rejoin the party in the capacity that all you boys would wish.

Yes we need to update the mission styles that we have and that is a big part of what we will be looking to do, but it is not going to happen overnight. You rightly voiced concerns over 'flying the same tired profile every time' in missions. Can I suggest that if one of your guys has a handle on the mission editor/scripting that he gives the mission writers details of what they need to have in there to make even the normal missions sit better with 3 sqn. Alan & Matt have done RAF Air a great service re missions, but it is difficult to be all things to all men when designing them unless they get guidance.

I know that all of 3sqn, and the OCU boys want to train, train, train to get to that ultimate level, and that is very admirable. RAF Air MUST cater for that, but we also need to cater for the guy who doesn't want to take it quite so seriously. Hopefully we are able to find a way of doing both.

Let me digress a bit. Sod all to do with DCS, but you will all get the reasoning. I play golf to quite a high standard, and as a result I play loads of competitive comps/matches for the county and my home club. I put a lot of time and effort into practice, like you do with BMS. It does pay off. However, there are times that all I wish to do, for my own sanity, is go out and have a fun, social game with my mates, take the piss whenever possible and have a few beers afterwards. I mention this just because sometimes it is good to do what you do, but not for the same reasons you have trained for. So to that end, yes you are all training hard on BMS but would you not occasionally like to, even with the limited functionality of the F16, fly a mission and adapt your RT/Formations etc etc so that you are able to fly as a whole just for limited fun.

Everyone needs to remember that non of us are professionals at running anything like this and most of us still have proper jobs that interfere so change inevitably may take longer than some would like.

Things definitely do need sorting out here, no one says they don't, so we will hopefully be able to do it with the help of all parties. This must succeed and Sharpe knows my feelings on all this.

[Sharpe]

All,
Based on discussions after our mission last night my name was put forward as 3(F) sqns rep.

I will keep this post open till Tuesday for anyone to voice any last minute names/concerns then I will delete it.

-S