Not fit for purpose

[Deleted member 777]

I'm hearing on the grapevine that a certain AT Ops Room has been labeled 'Not fit for purpose' and also 'the majority of staff are able to follow a tick box list, but have no idea why they are doing it or what to do if something goes wrong....' is this an endemic problem brought about by legacy procedures and management?

Shameful if true.....

 

[Rover One]

Was inevitable I am afraid.

A trade were paperwork dominates 90% of the working day to ensure complete and utter compliance to the whims of a bunch of people at HQ, will only create an environment where people's sole job is to make sure stuff is printed on the right coloured paper.

The skill sets required for ops jobs have gone out of the window, there is no room for initiative, common sense or ability day to day tasks. Supervisors are so caught up in **** and trivia that they have no opportunity to supervise those that need it. Checklists are a by product of this compliance to ATM500 crap, there are checklists to make sure check lists are completed.

They wonder why people are leaving and why the OJT skill sets held by JNCOs and SAC are not sufficient; this in turn will feed the SNCO cadre and the abilities of the past will be diluted by jobs worth paper pushers.

I feel for the SH Sqns of the future where the abilities, initiative and common sense of a good Opsy could work wonders, now what? very very sad.

Those in the land of the sponsors office, have a look at the beast that you have created and one day (if any of you ever leave the place) you may just be on the recieving end of what you have created.

 

[Hmmmm]

I've been out a while but always remember how valuable a TG9 Opsie could be in any scenario. On ops, I recollect a gp capt rock ape asking me to trade-in two useless Flt Ops Officers for one cpl TG9.

It would be a sad thing if the intelligence and initiative opportunities arebeing taken away from TG9 cpls and below.

 

[J Y Kelly]

I can't really comment directly on the subject but even in my sleepy little backwater I have heard mutterings, that is the nature of TG9. What I find difficult to understand is how the layers of bureaucracy in TG9 have flourished over the past few years. I find it strange that as numbers of personnel, aircraft and bases within the RAF have diminished, the proportion of higher management within the trade has grown and grown. I can see the need for progression within the trade but justifying certain posts must be very tenuous. I do wonder whether it was all so bad years ago and if all the changes that have been made since then are producing results.

I have never been a fan of checklists, I have had arguments about creating checklists for even the most basic tasks. They have there place but shouldn't replace knowledge. Some things can be taught by rote but most tasks carried out by Assistants will be sufficiently varied that the reasons why tasks are carried out and the consequences of failure should be fully understood.

I don't think the reasons for these shortcomings are straightforward, maybe the higher levels of TG9 have become little more than the inhabitants of the "B" Ark (a little Douglas Adams reference for the teenagers) more interested in the next email from Command than what's happening on the shop floor. Regarding the up and coming generation of Assistants I'm disappointed to say that it's mostly a celebration of mediocrity, only one out of the twelve that I work with showing anything more than minimal interest in the job.

 

[Mag2grid]

To be fair, is the Flt Ops Officer branch going to be drawn down and consigned to history? The last I heard there wasn't upwards progression, people pretty much treading water until a decision was made, which came as a great shock to 2 of my intake at Cranditz who on their branch sponsor visit day got told they could expect progression no higher then Wg Cdr....if they were required that long in branch! As such I wouldn't be surprised if morale/ motivation is rock bottom at that level, not really an excuse for "leaders of men" but can understand why.

I did have the pleasure of holding on a busy SH base in Oxfordshire not so long before de mobbing, on one of squadrons, the daily interaction I had with them was that the entire ops structure pretty much had to think on their feet daily, not many check lists.

its shame if it has gone this way.

 

[Scouser812]

showing anything more than minimal interest in the job.

I whole heatedly agree with the above quote from J Y Kellu there. The severe lack of enthusiasm for the actual job is appalling.
I have only been in trade 5 years, but the attitude towards being a member of tg9 on my station is seen as wasting 5-7 hours a day...and working 7-6 is disgusting.

Going back to the OP, t's all well and good following checklists, but some don't even do that, then wonder why they are having a closed door chat with the FOM and/or Cpl. Checklists are, as far as I'm aware, are a back up.

The mass of emails that are being sent by higher ups is annoying too, I can't go a day without receiving an email about this that & the other, prime example being "the station is having such an event on, volunteers are required for this that and the other duty...if no one volunteers ops wing will provide manning (not support Wing, the flying squadrons or SAR...Ops wing)