I’ve noticed that there have been a number of adverse comments in various threads about the current ‘fast track’ (FT) system and some support for a replacement Direct Entry (DE) system. As I was one of the individuals at the old HQ MATO who initially proposed the change to TG9, and then did a considerable amount of the staff work to actually implement the change, I feel it appropriate to throw my hat in the ring and comment on why I believe the FT system is preferable to a DE system.
Firstly, why was the change necessary? Well I don’t think anyone could honestly say that the old TG9 structure served either the individual or the service particularly well. The main problem was the length of time it took individuals to be selected for promotion to Sgt and then attend CATCS to attempt to pass the JATCC. I sat on three Cpl – Sgt promotion boards and conversion selection boards in the mid 1990’s and there was a wealth of talent at Cpl from which the board had to select the most suitable candidates. However, the problem was that the age of most of those selected was generally late twenties to early thirties and, as anyone who has served as a CATCS Instructor will tell you, the older you are when you start the JATCC, the greater the chance that you will fail and this simple fact has been born out by the results over many years. It simply boils down to something that applies in many areas of life – old dog, new tricks. So what we needed to do was to get the average age of the SNCO attending the JATCC down to about the same age as the JO. In addition, at the time we were suffering a slow, but steady erosion of controller numbers, quite simply more people were leaving the specialisation every year than the JATCC could possibly replace, even taking the general drawdown into account – to put it bluntly, what we needed was more ‘bums on seats’. So we had to act, doing nothing was not an option, so let us consider the options that were available:
1. Increase the JATCC throughput using current TG9 personnel. This option was considered, but rejected for the following reasons. The JATCC simulators have always been geared for a maximum course size of 16, so any increase over 16 would mean additional simulators and staff - I was serving at CATCS in the mid 1980’s when we were forced to go up 20 per course and it was a nightmare. Space is already limited at Shawbury and also identifying sufficient funding in the short term for this option would have been very difficult. Furthermore, this option does not address the root cause of the problem – the average age of those selected for the JATCC. For these reasons this option was rejected.
2. DE SNCOs was an obvious option and initially this had some attractions. We could have only recruited individuals with an aptitude pass, put them through the Airmen Aircrew Course (AAC), then onto the JATCC. Certainly those who made it to Shawbury would be on average considerably younger than those on the ‘old’ TG9 system, but would the AAC have prepared them all that well? Perhaps some people out there believe that the current graduates from the AAC are well prepared to be effective SNCOs? I think there is plenty of evidence to the contrary and judging by some of the comments that I frequently hear, I think the AAC is a means to an end, rather than an ideal solution. Airmen aircrew, by the very nature of their duties, spend the majority of the time immersed in their primary duties within a squadron where they can be ‘guided’ in their development as a SNCO by more experienced colleagues. How much would DE ATC SNCOs actually know about the RAF in general and ATC in particular? I agreed with my boss and many others that a DE SNCO scheme would be likely to create as many problems as it would solve and it was rejected.
3. The only other option was a FT scheme. This would achieve our main aim of reducing the age of those who made it to the JATCC. Furthermore, rather than just streaming those selected at AFCOs through the AAC, the FT scheme would allow the ‘RAF’ at large, and TG9 personnel in particular, to actually have a close look at those selected for up to 5 years. Some checks and balances could be put in place to ensure that any real ‘no-hopers’ or thoroughly undesirable individuals who had somehow managed to get their foot in the door, could then be identified during this period and not given the appropriate recommendations. I would always contend that FT individuals will learn more about the RAF in general and ATC in particular during their period of training than anyone attending the AAC. This is the reason we recommended the FT scheme in preference to the DE scheme.
However, I wouldn’t wish to give the impression that this decision was not debated widely by TG9 personnel. We held a seminar at HQ MATO which was attended by a wide range of WOs and SNCO from right across TG9. The various options were debated at length and the unanimous decision was in favour of a FT system. This decision was again debated at length by various senior individuals at HQ MATO and HQ PTC before eventually being recommended. Exactly what has changed since this decision was made – nothing other than some people have started moaning about the ‘quality’ of some FT individuals?
Those who support a DE system in preference to the current FT system seem to imagine that a change to a DE system will be a panacea to current difficulties in TG9, but what will any change actually solve? The people that are joining the FT system now, are exactly the same people who would join a DE system. So the individuals wouldn’t actually change, just the training they would undergo before attending the JATCC. If anyone actually thinks that there is a pool of individuals out there just waiting to join the RAF under a DE SNCO ATC scheme, who won’t join under the current FT scheme, they need to give themselves a reality check.
Sadly, any change to a new TG9 structure will always result in some individuals feeling that they have been disadvantaged – that is a fact of life, but shouldn’t be an obstacle to change for the better. But I would also state that, as the new FT scheme has ‘ramped in’ and the old system has ‘ramped out’, many of those individuals serving under the old TG9 structure have been given a shot at the JATCC. By now, anyone who hasn’t been given a shot at the JATCC would never have had a chance under the old system, they simply would not have been sufficiently competitive. The new scheme isn’t ideal and I believe all FT individuals need to be formally mentored during the early years of their service in preparation for the JATCC and beyond - this is being now being addressed. In addition, a short bespoke ‘SNCO training’ course prior to the JATCC would be useful, but is unlikely to ever be funded – we don’t live in an ideal world and never will.
I have current experience of FT individuals and in my opinion in terms of overall ability and aptitude, they differ little from the younger SNCOs we used to see at CATCS. Indeed in 2005 the average age of the FT student was only one year older than the DE JO and the success rate was the same for both groups. In comparison, the average age of the 'old TG9 SNCO' student was three years higher than the FT student and their failure rate was more than double, it was nearly quadruple. Some FT students are very good, the majority are average and you wonder if a few have ever sat an aptitude test, but that is true of any group of students who attempt the JATCC.
In summary, the FT system has barely started and before we can make a reasoned and accurate assessment on whether it has been a success or failure, it must allow it to run for at least 10 years or more. I believe strongly that the current proposals to change from a FT to a DE system are both ill considered and premature. We have suffered continual change in the RAF since the end of the Cold War and unfortunately many changes have been made before a previous change has even been given a reasonable period of time to bed-in. I sincerely hope we don’t make this mistake with TG9 and instead allow those currently recruited under the FT system a sufficient period of time to prove its worth.
Cerberus - hat back on to cover bald head and ready for incoming.
