• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

RCAF aircrew shortage

jaysfan17

Member
Reaction score
1
Points
230
Eagle Eye View said:
We crunched the numbers and we need at least 45 new AES Ops per year out of 402 in order to keep up with the attrition and the new upcoming positions.

Ah, I didn't realize how significant the demand was.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
3,918
Points
1,260
Eagle Eye View said:
If I had a crystal ball, the way things are going, when FAcT rolls out in 2023, 402 Sqn will still be here in Winnipeg flying the Dash8.

In a funny and ironic turn of events, imagine sending Nav and AESOP students to Australia instead of the other way around (back in the day).
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
1,562
Points
1,060
luttrellfan said:
Why not? In theory couldn't you stick whoever's left of the 45 on PAT and they wait for the next serial (assuming the budget's in place to pay for it)?

You want to drive people out of the CAF? Have them sit for a year on restricted posting away from their families before they start a rather long QL3 (I assume) course that is also away from their families before they're actually OFP and posted. Have you ever been to a PAT Platoon? I know the CA is going to make it worse, but even a RCAF PAT Platoon doing WASF for a year is going to suck a whole heck of a lot.

Eagle Eye View said:
We crunched the numbers and we need at least 45 new AES Ops per year out of 402 in order to keep up with the attrition and the new upcoming positions.

Is that possible without emptying the line Sqns of instructors? I know with Sigs we have a heck of a time either posting good people to the school to teach, or even getting good people on tasking to instruct. Line units just need them too much. Vicious circle.
 

Eagle_Eye_View

Full Member
Reaction score
21
Points
260
When we recruit direct entry AES Op, once BMQ completed, we post them to the nearest base/Wing/armoury to their home. They are on TD while attending BAQC here in Winnipeg. Once they graduate, they get posted to one of their choices.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
1,042
Points
1,090
I realize this thread is aircrew dominated & you guys are talking about all kinds of specifics within the RCAF that folks outside the RCAF wouldn't understand in the depth or complexity that you do.  And it's good to read all the different perspectives on these issues, as there is more to be gained from an insider's perspective.

I'll ask again what I asked about a month ago, in a different thread:


If you could choose 3 things the RCAF could implement in the next year or two to help address this issue - what would they be?  

(Any and all reasonable suggestions would be appreciated!  More training at unit level?  More folks hired?  Expanding instructor/training aircraft inventory?  As someone with 0 RCAF experience, really curious to hear what the working folks have to say about what could be done, reasonably, to fix this)

 

Eagle_Eye_View

Full Member
Reaction score
21
Points
260
My top three that IMO would improve the issue:
1. Money for A/C modernization and infrastructure;
2. Get rid of the non sense secondary duties; and
3. Introduce retention bonuses.
 

kev994

Sr. Member
Reaction score
642
Points
1,060
1. Quit the non-stop barrage of new rules that require more work. 2. Knit some more instructors to share the workload. 3. 20 year pension plan.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
3,918
Points
1,260
1.  Boots (or flight suits, judging by some I've seen)
2.  Beards
3.  Weed

Did I get it right?    :rofl:
 

BurmaShave

Jr. Member
Reaction score
8
Points
130
CBH99 said:
I realize this thread is aircrew dominated & you guys are talking about all kinds of specifics within the RCAF that folks outside the RCAF wouldn't understand in the depth or complexity that you do.  And it's good to read all the different perspectives on these issues, as there is more to be gained from an insider's perspective.

I'll ask again what I asked about a month ago, in a different thread:


If you could choose 3 things the RCAF could implement in the next year or two to help address this issue - what would they be?  

(Any and all reasonable suggestions would be appreciated!  More training at unit level?  More folks hired?  Expanding instructor/training aircraft inventory?  As someone with 0 RCAF experience, really curious to hear what the working folks have to say about what could be done, reasonably, to fix this)

Looking at the production end of things: anything we do to get above 115 new wings grads per year needs money, potentially a lot of it.

From a Moose Jaw level, we’re at max capacity. If they wanted to boost it, we’d need more planes (and so more instructors and maintainers), more sims (one’s down right now, and it’s causing a backlog), and ideally the ability to fly in light ice. Any of that is a huge expense: planes are $6 million, sims are $15 million.

We could rethink helo training. Right now we spend $750,000 on a Phase II slot, give prospective pilots 80 flights hours on effectively a prop fighter, and then send em off to Portage to relearn everything. Maybe Phase II Jet Ranger would be a better option?

That, of course, would require more equipment and instructors in different places ($$), and a rethink of our current selection process (which happens at the end of Phase II). Would it be worth it? I’m totally unqualified to say.

I’m not even sure Phase II production is part of the problem. The gun squadrons (Jets) said they can’t take all the folks the training system is giving them. Several other OTUs’ wait times are through the roof. Maybe production isn’t the solution.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
6,411
Points
1,090
Streamlined rotary wing training was proposed is an occupational analysis nearly two decades ago, as I recall. The high mucky mucks of the Air Force refused.
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
7,918
Points
1,360
dapaterson said:
Streamlined rotary wing training was proposed is an occupational analysis nearly two decades ago, as I recall. The high mucky mucks of the Air Force refused.

“It’s better if we train everyone through Basic (old name for Ph II) on the jets (Tutor), so that community transfers (as rare as they were in the day) take less time and money...”

#pennywisepoundfoolish
 

jaysfan17

Member
Reaction score
1
Points
230
PuckChaser said:
You want to drive people out of the CAF? Have them sit for a year on restricted posting away from their families before they start a rather long QL3 (I assume) course that is also away from their families before they're actually OFP and posted. Have you ever been to a PAT Platoon? I know the CA is going to make it worse, but even a RCAF PAT Platoon doing WASF for a year is going to suck a whole heck of a lot.

I get that PAT Platoon sucks, but if you really wanted the trade/job than they wouldn't quit (barring any personal or other issues that arise that would give you no choice but to step away or release). That's just my view, but I get where you're coming from.
 

kev994

Sr. Member
Reaction score
642
Points
1,060
Production is only part of the solution. Once they get on squadron you need someone who can teach them, and people with those skill sets are disappearing fast.
 

runormal

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
luttrellfan said:
I get that PAT Platoon sucks, but if you really wanted the trade/job than they wouldn't quit (barring any personal or other issues that arise that would give you no choice but to step away or release). That's just my view, but I get where you're coming from.

100% disagree. If my employer made me wait a year to do the training that I signed up for, I'd start looking elsewhere and very quickly. Especially as DE candidate, who knows nothing about the CF. I had to wait 2 weeks for training for training at my civy job when I got out of University. All I could do was read manuals, since I didn't even have access to the system that I was hired on for. That sucked, and while I was thankful for the job, I was glad that it didn't drag on for much longer.

I'd be more understanding and willing if I was either an OT or CT/OT, because in theory I could be tasked out to do something else while I wait for training since I might have some transferable skills.
 

blacktriangle

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
252
Points
880
luttrellfan said:
I get that PAT Platoon sucks, but if you really wanted the trade/job than they wouldn't quit (barring any personal or other issues that arise that would give you no choice but to step away or release). That's just my view, but I get where you're coming from.

I get what you are saying, but from experience (albeit dated) I respectfully disagree.
 

Sub_Guy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
kev994 said:
Production is only part of the solution. Once they get on squadron you need someone who can teach them, and people with those skill sets are disappearing fast.

☝️  This.

Everyone keeps looking at how to boost numbers, through recruitment and streamlined training, but few are looking at how to keep experience.  We are bleeding dry. 

No one really cares if a school can pump out 36 or 40 grads a year, if there’s no personnel to mentor them on Sqn then what’s the point?  We need to retain talent. 

 

Zoomie

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
161
Points
680
1) More L101 for TD and FG;
2) More YFR and the PERs needed to support that increase; and
3) more freedom for FG missions/destinations.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,788
Points
1,060
Ref the direct entry or remuster baby AES Ops, being on the guys who has to deal with them at the line units after they are qualified on an operational aircraft, I'll take 2 remusters over 3 direct entry types any day of the week.  Overall they're more useful and have the perspective of the side of the grass that isn't so green, and they appreciate the perks.  They are also more useful once they reach top category and that is what we need right now more than 'just numbers'.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
3,923
Points
1,010
Eye In The Sky said:
Ref the direct entry or remuster baby AES Ops, being on the guys who has to deal with them at the line units after they are qualified on an operational aircraft, I'll take 2 remusters over 3 direct entry types any day of the week.  Overall they're more useful and have the perspective of the side of the grass that isn't so green, and they appreciate the perks.  They are also more useful once they reach top category and that is what we need right now more than 'just numbers'.

True, but for the long term health and staying power of your trade, having some DEAs around are an important factor in lowering the overall average age of your trade. We also break them, physically, less frequently.
 

FSTG

Guest
Reaction score
0
Points
10
Don't know if it's the same for ACSO, but it's been almost 8 months since my CFAT and i'm not even scheduled yet to write the ACS for PLT as DEO, which is the next step for me. I don't think it's related to application profil (engineering degree, good GPA, fit, no criminal record or stain of any kind and was told i performed very well in the CFAT). I can see how people are discouraged from following the lenghty process even if its not my case.
 
Top