Discussion only - RAAF Officer Aircrew system

[dimsum]

For discussion purposes only, this is the "new" method for selection for Royal Australian Air Force Pilots, ACSO, and AEC equivalents.

Essentially, everyone who wants to be those joins up as "Officer Aircrew", and they get selected for Pilot, Mission Aircrew (AKA ACSO), or Mission Controller (AKA AEC) during the application process. I see the key difference being that everyone who applies as Officer Aircrew will go through Aircrew selection for Pilot, rather than only the relevant parts for ACSO and AEC.

I'm not affiliated with CFRG, but I was wondering if this method would work for the CAF. It would take longer to select folks since all aircrew officer candidates go through Trenton, but then folks don't need to re-test if they got, say, AEC and wanted to OT to Pilot within a short time.

Thoughts?

Officer Aviation

Become an accomplished leader, manager and decision-maker with world-class training. You will have the opportunity to directly operate the world’s most technically advanced airborne surveillance, control, and weapons systems in one of multiple roles.

www.defencejobs.gov.au

Split into three main pathways – Pilot, Mission Aircrew and Mission Controller – the application process for each pathway is the same, and as your application progresses, you will be advised which training pathway you are joining.

As you progress through your training, there are a number of streaming decision points that will determine what kind of Pilot, Mission Aircrew or Mission Controller you will be. Your final allocation is based on a combination of your preference, performance on course and position availability.


Pilot pathway

• Fast Jet Pilot
• Fixed Wing Pilot

Mission Aircrew pathway

• Weapon Systems Officer
• Air Mobility Officer
• Maritime Patrol and Response Officer

Mission Controller pathway

• Air Traffic Controller
• Air Battle Manager

 

[SeaKingTacco]

IIRC, when I joined in 1985, that was the method for ANAV and Pilot- everyone went to aircrew selection and were tested, then sorted. I joined as “aircrew general”, then was told half way through BOTC I was an Air Nav, vice pilot.

I can see an attrition point right at that moment, if you did not get want you thought you were joining for (don’t assume everyone wants to be a pilot…) . On the other hand, it is nice for the RCAF to know, with some scientific certainty, what their applicant pool is actual suited for.

The farther one gets into the training mill, the higher the risk that you over-training/qualifying people for a career path, as you stream them. There is also the complication of trying to align all the common courses (HPMA,Met, theory of flight, air regs)/not common courses (aircraft type training) so people are not standing around for years as OJTs.

 

[dapaterson]

The farther one gets into the training mill, the higher the risk that you over-training/qualifying people for a career path, as you stream them. There is also the complication of trying to align all the common courses (HPMA,Met, theory of flight, air regs)/not common courses (aircraft type training) so people are not standing around for years as OJTs.

Why change tradition?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Why change tradition?

It is not tradition.

Back in the day, one moved relatively seamlessly through the training system…before contracting.

I am not saying there is a correlation, or anything…

 

[dapaterson]

Tradition in the CAF is anything that lasts more than 48 hours, it sometimes seems...

 

[dimsum]

Tradition in the CAF is anything that lasts more than 48 hours, it sometimes seems...

“Once is an incident; twice is a trend; thrice is a tradition”

 

[Blackadder1916]

IIRC, when I joined in 1985, that was the method for ANAV and Pilot- everyone went to aircrew selection and were tested, then sorted. I joined as “aircrew general”, then was told half way through BOTC I was an Air Nav, vice pilot.

I can see an attrition point right at that moment, if you did not get want you thought you were joining for (don’t assume everyone wants to be a pilot…) . On the other hand, it is nice for the RCAF to know, with some scientific certainty, what their applicant pool is actual suited for.

The farther one gets into the training mill, the higher the risk that you over-training/qualifying people for a career path, as you stream them. There is also the complication of trying to align all the common courses (HPMA,Met, theory of flight, air regs)/not common courses (aircraft type training) so people are not standing around for years as OJTs.

The way I read the Ozzie site, it is only the selection process that lumps all the "officer aviation" trades together. Before you sign on the dotted line, you are told which "pathway" (trade) you're offered.

Split into three main pathways – Pilot, Mission Aircrew and Mission Controller – the application process for each pathway is the same, and as your application progresses, you will be advised which training pathway you are joining.

I thought that the "aircrew general" applied only to ROTP. I also went officer (from the ranks) in 1985. While I don't recall any Air Navs in my BOTC platoon, there were two pilots who knew from the beginning that they were going to be pilots. Of course, our BOTC (Aug-Dec) were almost exclusively DEOs and OCTPs who, in most cases, began their Phase 2 (or whatever their initial classification training was called) immediately after BOTC and the travel/XMas leave that followed.

CFAO 9-12 ROTP

11. Enrolment. On enrolment an officer cadet will be assigned to a
specific MOC or to the Air Operations, Land Operations or Engineering
functional groupings as outlined in Appendix 1 to Annex A. . . .

12. Post Enrolment. An officer cadet, previously assigned to a functional
grouping, will be assigned to one of the officer MOCs within the functional
grouping normally during the initial year of subsidization. An officer
cadet who fails to maintain the academic or military standards required by
the MOC to which Fe officer cadet is assigned is subject to compulsory
transfer to another MOC regardless of functional grouping. The approving
authority for such transfers is NDHQ/Director Personnel Careers Officers
(DPCO).

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Tradition in the CAF is anything that lasts more than 48 hours, it sometimes seems...

Like burning pianos?

 

[dimsum]

Like burning pianos?

Oh no.

That thing, like most of what the "senior service" (formed in Canada decades after the first Canadian regiments) does, was inherited from the Brits.

 

[Good2Golf]

IIRC, when I joined in 1985, that was the method for ANAV and Pilot- everyone went to aircrew selection and were tested, then sorted. I joined as “aircrew general”, then was told half way through BOTC I was an Air Nav, vice pilot.

You and me both, brother. 098D AIRGEN