MilitaryForums.co.uk

It's actually 1.2% higher than the rate of inflation!

There has to be a catch somewhere....

Like the Defence Airfield Review Team (DART) that is touring the country looking to shut 40% of the RAF's airfields.

tyke172 wrote:It's actually 1.2% higher than the rate of inflation!

There has to be a catch somewhere....

Is it ? Yes there is bound to be a catch!

So it looks like 7000 jobs in the RAf are going, early withdrawl of all Jaguars and closure of Colitshall (and probably more) by 2007.

This doesn't bode well for those of us waiting for letters. And what I want to know is how do they get rid of 7000 people who will all have service contracts ? I raise my point again of how safe is my job even if I do get in ?

Hi All,

Just thought I'd chip in my five pence worth guys. So todays the day when everyone finds out how much the sh*t will hit the fan for the RAF !.

One thing that bothers me is that oddly enough when I had a little freetime at OASC, I happened to pick up a recent Airforce magazine and read a very interesting article. It was about the USA's attempt to build a stealth helicopter, one that would not be able to be seen on radar. However, the US government has pulled the plug on this project for one main reason ;
If someone decides to launch a rocket propelled grenade from a rooftop against such a helicopter the stealth design will do absolutely bugger all !. Lessons learned in Iraq have meant the US government will stop throwing millions of dollars into this now doomed project.

So, what is good old Johnny English doing ?, Spending money on new technologies that will help streamline the armed forces. Why ?, because with new technologies you don't need that many forces on the ground or air for that matter !. The Iraqi insurgents must be quaking in there boots at how this new technology will dumbfound them and make them lay down there weapons !.

Undoubtedly, the armed forces needs a review however numbers on the ground will always be the way forward no matter what technology is available. Lessons in the three former conflicts Bosnia, Afghanistan and Iraq should have proved that to PM Blair.

RANT OVER !!!!!!!

TJD wrote: Natural wastage set against a lower recruiting target (which is already in place) and offering redundancy/servereance to selected trades. Quite simple.

I still think i'm doomed!

Just read about the cuts - 7,500 is a lot.

However, are these likely to be those personnel reaching the end of their service contracts or eligible for early retirement?

Having been shortlisted as a legal officer I'm wondering how many lawyers the RAF will need with these level of cuts!

Oh well should hear in the next couple of weeks.

Fingers crossed for those all shortlisted and those who are keep your chin up!

The Army is cutting 4 Battalions. It is also spending £300 million on the Watchkeeper recce UAV project.

Wouldn't those 1700 troops have provided better recce information if deployed in that role?

Plus, they would be multi-role (an 'in' concept for the politicians) as they could actually shoot people too!!!

Hi Biggles,

You appear to be a man in the know on statistics and information in the RAF. Can you tell me how many people the RAF loses a year through natural wastage please ?.

That's a sticky subject.

There are two types of natural wastage.

In a normal year there is the turn-around of those personnel that decide to leave the Service or come to their retirement/exit point. This varies, but a rough approximation would be 2000 airmen/SNCOs and 300 Officers.

With these manpower cuts, you've also got to factor in an extra dimension. That being the fact that many personnel will not be permitted to extend their initial terms of service and will, in fact, be taking unpaid redundancy.

The Govt uses terms like 'natural wastage' to disguise the fact that a whole lot of personnel will be leaving the Service against their will (aka unpaid redundancy). Of course, the term 'natural wastage' sounds very much like things are business as usual. This is not true. There are lots of worried people in the Forces at the moment.

Hi Biggles,

Thanks for the information, am just trying to piece things together as to how the lie of the land will be if I get a place. It would apear that anyone capable of entering IOT has been put on the 'short list' until things calm down and numbers required are released.

I have to say I am appalled at what is happening in the RAF, this government seem intent on destroying any part of our proud British history that they deem non politically correct. A great shame for all of the hard working men and women in the armed forces.

2nd time round wrote:Hi Biggles,

Thanks for the information, am just trying to piece things together as to how the lie of the land will be if I get a place. It would apear that anyone capable of entering IOT has been put on the 'short list' until things calm down and numbers required are released.

I have to say I am appalled at what is happening in the RAF, this government seem intent on destroying any part of our proud British history that they deem non politically correct. A great shame for all of the hard working men and women in the armed forces.

I'm even considering turning a place down if I was offered one......

Hi Cathy,

Have to say, am not over enamored with things the way they are at the minute. Kind of puts things into perspective don't you think ?.

After all if we do get in, what sort of a career path will there be left to follow ?.

2nd time round wrote:Hi Cathy,

Have to say, am not over enamored with things the way they are at the minute. Kind of puts things into perspective don't you think ?.

After all if we do get in, what sort of a career path will there be left to follow ?.

Exactly my thoughts, my Plan B is rapidly becoming my Plan A.