stacker4ever
Hot Refueller
- 198
- 0
- 0
I would add some comments on this post but this wing mong is cowering in the corner hoping its all just a bad dream! Now the JSP 317 on the other hand im all over that!
Welcome to E-Goat :: The Totally Unofficial Royal Air Force Rumour Network
Join our free community to unlock a range of benefits like:
- Post and participate in discussions.
- Send and receive private messages with other members.
- Respond to polls and surveys.
- Upload and share content.
- Gain access to exclusive features and tools.
Trending
This Week
View More Trending
- 1,714
- 63
- 162
Not a fcuking scoobie! Probably not
Yup, but every Unit is different so why shouldn't the limits be different
- 1,714
- 63
- 162
Why should they be different? The forces are a regular, uniformed organisation.... the clue being in the words 'regular' and 'uniformed' and they don't relate soley to the clothing that is worn. A common set of rules/regs/whatever so no matter where you go you are (supposedly) singing off the same song sheet and folks don't need re-training every time they move.
What next? Different pay-scales depending on the type of unit you're on. I don't think so!!
Sh88ite!! I think I've just bitten
The Helpful Stacker
Corporal
- 327
- 0
- 0
Sounds good to me.
Those folk who live in pikey, impoverished parts of the country such as Yorkshire or The English Colonial Territories of Caledonia require less money than those who reside in better quality areas such as the south of England.
I'd vote for that.
DT_Xtremez_14:- 1,714
- 63
- 162
THS,
I meant what the unit does not where the unit is. I don't think any of our currently serving brethren do a lesser job than any of their counterparts just because they may be on a minor unit. I heard from the stackers at Witt that they were viewed as second-class citizens (even though they were not) by their opposite numbers 16 miles up the A1 when that abortion of the Harrier Force single supply account was introduced - a divisive measure if ever there was one - because there were 'only in the support role'. If BMs ever get the power to locally decide pay-scales then the service really is finished.
p.s. Is the 'DL' referred to in an earlier post a short, ever-so-slightly rotund, bespectacled gentleman with a distinct Lancastrian accent and a distinct love of the Jags?
I meant what the unit does not where the unit is. I don't think any of our currently serving brethren do a lesser job than any of their counterparts just because they may be on a minor unit. I heard from the stackers at Witt that they were viewed as second-class citizens (even though they were not) by their opposite numbers 16 miles up the A1 when that abortion of the Harrier Force single supply account was introduced - a divisive measure if ever there was one - because there were 'only in the support role'. If BMs ever get the power to locally decide pay-scales then the service really is finished.
p.s. Is the 'DL' referred to in an earlier post a short, ever-so-slightly rotund, bespectacled gentleman with a distinct Lancastrian accent and a distinct love of the Jags?
Norman the Storeman
QA Acolyte
- 885
- 16
- 0
Perhaps if the Witt end of the SSA deal had been administered in a more professional manner then maybe they would not have been viewed as second class tradesmen.
But, back to financial limits, are all of them going to be "made up" by the budget manager?
What do they refer to for guidance?
If it involves a relative can this colour their judgement?
On the subject of the abomination now referred to as a JSP, maybe they were not counting on us having the ability to read.
But, back to financial limits, are all of them going to be "made up" by the budget manager?
What do they refer to for guidance?
If it involves a relative can this colour their judgement?
On the subject of the abomination now referred to as a JSP, maybe they were not counting on us having the ability to read.
2007DIN04-175 Released DEC 2007 to take effect 1st April 2008, contains the trivial discrepancy rate limits.
In addition QRs appendix 6 contains guidance on write off procedures.
I do hope no budget managers have been reading this thread thinking they can do their own thing.
I just hope DL & PW read this thread.
In addition QRs appendix 6 contains guidance on write off procedures.
I do hope no budget managers have been reading this thread thinking they can do their own thing.
I just hope DL & PW read this thread.
Many thanks for all the guidance but I think you see where i was coming from - its a backward step.
In the 'good old days' we spent several weeks doing an FT1 course which helped teach everyone how to find a way through the various AP's - then they got rid of that but put a SEARCH facility in the new On-Line version now they have taken that away. Does this mean that duty supply staff have to rely on Work Procedures to 'advise' engineers on procedures.
My big point in all of this is that when individuals are sent OOA to a role they may have not done for a number of years this new dogs dinner of a publication is no help. As we all know when you go out on an OOA you don't have the luxury of time to read several volumes of regulations you want and need a quick accurate way of finding the relevant information. It is surely not acceptable or 'quality' to have to contact DL and others to ask what the current regulations are and where they are!
In the 'good old days' we spent several weeks doing an FT1 course which helped teach everyone how to find a way through the various AP's - then they got rid of that but put a SEARCH facility in the new On-Line version now they have taken that away. Does this mean that duty supply staff have to rely on Work Procedures to 'advise' engineers on procedures.
My big point in all of this is that when individuals are sent OOA to a role they may have not done for a number of years this new dogs dinner of a publication is no help. As we all know when you go out on an OOA you don't have the luxury of time to read several volumes of regulations you want and need a quick accurate way of finding the relevant information. It is surely not acceptable or 'quality' to have to contact DL and others to ask what the current regulations are and where they are!
This thread was started by that old buss spottin' bloke about the new JSP format. No one gives a to55 about limits etc unless you actually need to use them. Bottom line the new JSP is pish! I spent ages trying to find the DPR regs the other day.
By the way RAFbird only takes the new JSP to bed 'cos its now all electronic!
By the way RAFbird only takes the new JSP to bed 'cos its now all electronic!
M
Mr C Hinecap
Guest
The current RAF bits of the 886 are fine - not perfect, but not bad. it is just different to what you were trained on. USAS II blew a few brains - until people got used to it and accepted that it was different.
Things had to change - I'm really sorry you never kept up with things - but there are damned good reasons for bringing together the regs for the 3 Services. If you can't see that, then you really do need help.
Things had to change - I'm really sorry you never kept up with things - but there are damned good reasons for bringing together the regs for the 3 Services. If you can't see that, then you really do need help.
Norman the Storeman
QA Acolyte
- 885
- 16
- 0
Blimey! Hello Kettle, this Pot. You're black, over!
4500 outstanding U34s for Cott a/c Sqns tells the story buddy. I rest my case, your honour.
DT_Xtremez_15:Bollox...676 accounting for explosive stores...major step backwards...
)Will be putting the question why, at our ESIT next week, especially as they are withdrawing the F676 in the future. I would be spending all day raising F676's and getting nothing else done (the joys of a regt sqn!)