Training cell workload to get worse

[enginesuck]

The Amms here have been in my opinion a great bunch of lads thoroughly professional, there are the occasional bad apples but that has been and always will be the case.

 

[enginesuck]

Surely if you cant get a new lad to tow the line through providing a positive example you have failed as a JNCO ??

Then of course its down to good old fashioned bodgings and trips to the EWS !

 

[Odie]

I'm a JNCO fairy myself, we've been disempowered to a point you'd find hard to believe.

There in lies the problem. There are those JNCOs that play the "your my bestest mate" game who undermine it for those that try and mentor the less experienced lads. DT_Xtremez_21: OK, that problem is added to because some managements insist on employing their JNCOs as a better paid JT/SAC (Tech) DT_Xtremez_09: - the result of excessive leaning? DT_Xtremez_06:

 

[DrunkenMonki]

I've been a bit unlucky as a JNCO I suppose. I was the first SAC(T) promoted on my squadron - and I stayed in post! That was very, very hard. I ran the LITS cell, but also worked the line etc, and some of the JT's were very hard work. I can sort of understand them being miffed though.

My next posting was (and is) to a software team, the only SAC's we have are scopies. For whatever reason, must be in their training, they workship the ground NCO's walk on, you say jump, they do. Shiney shoes, the full monty. So its spoiling me again - when (if) I ever make it back to aircraft I will have to find my feet again. I have plenty of mates who are still on squadrons though, and as pointed out the SNCO's effectively use them as senior JT's at some times (trade) and SNCO's at other times (when they want to go home early).

 

[Dave-exfairy]

There arn't enough NCO's left around to be there all the time Dave, also, pull any of the Daddy Liney stuff you are on about nowadays, you'll end up with a court martial. Kids nowadays know their rights, theres no physical threat you can use, its down to pure respect.

If an NCO fails to gain that through his experience, quite often the only way left is the 'be my mate' approach. Simply telling someone to do something may work, but can you guarantee the quality of the result? Things arn't as easy as you seem to believe, I'm a JNCO fairy myself, we've been disempowered to a point you'd find hard to believe.

Never was subjected to physical threats, we respected those above us.
What's the point of having Cpl tapes if you don't use your authority and have to use the best mate approach? Military discipline really has been eroded then, god knows what state the mob will be in in 10 years time!

 

[DrunkenMonki]

Don't get me wrong, i've never used the mates approach. But there are some very headstrong young people now, and like I said, they know there rights. You have to be right, first time, every time. Sad way for things to go, but here we are. I've yet to work with AMM's, and I hope they at least will be taught military discipline.

 

[Dave-exfairy]

Don't get me wrong, i've never used the mates approach. But there are some very headstrong young people now, and like I said, they know there rights. You have to be right, first time, every time. Sad way for things to go, but here we are. I've yet to work with AMM's, and I hope they at least will be taught military discipline.

"Headstrong"? Bit of a kind word that!DT_Xtremez_15:
You know the phrase "Charity begins at home?", well so does discipline, sadly something it seems the some of today's youth know nothing about.

 

[Goatherdingsplitter]

What standard is required ? or what standard do you want them to be at ?

As long as they know not to touch anything they dont understand, followed by doing as there told, they are probably at the same standard as when I arrived on my first unit.

Too much info stuffed down there throat in a classroom or a false environment like the Halton / Tossford airfield can have a negitive effect. Get them out of training asap and get them out in to the thick of it.

They have never and will never pass out of training fully qualified to do anything.
They need proper training by the blokes that do the job stop bleating about it and get on with it.
Its a sad day when an liney no matter what rank, expects more cash to show someone less experienced how to do a job.

To answer your questions and statements:

1. The standard required to graduate is Training Performance Standard, as opposed to Operational Standard achieved through OJT & relevant courses. As the SAC Techs spent 20 days at LTF and were technician taught, I'm surprised that the AMMs line phase has been cut, however, there is not a great deal of classroom time given the 5 trades they are being taught to assist in.

2. They do leave pre-qualified for one thing, that is the return for technician training subject to achieving the required assessments.

 

[fat lazy techie]

Let's put a different slant on this then shall we. AMMs, who's primary role is the day to day flight servicing of aircraft, will be getting just 15 days of line training. Armourers will be getting 20 days of line training, as will the Arabic students. To me that says the Arabs are getting better/more training than our own trainees apart from the armourers. Now before the little darlings go to the line the training performance standard they have to achieve is to be able to assist with tasks. When they get to the line they have to be able to complete tasks witout error and be safe.

I would again like to suggest those of you who work on training cells pay a visit to Cosford and see what is getting taught and what is being proposed. You may be a little concerned as it would appear the trade sponsor is happy. Yes your AMMs may have been good till now, but just be prepared for some utter $hite getting through as the standards get lowered.

 

[Sospan]

Let's put a different slant on this then shall we. AMMs, who's primary role is the day to day flight servicing of aircraft, will be getting just 15 days of line training. Armourers will be getting 20 days of line training.

Only 20 days ?::

Back on topic, how many days have they chopped and do you know what parts of the syllabus been binned ? Or have you just been leaned ? DT_Xtremez_35:

 

[fat lazy techie]

I'll have a look later but I can safely say helicopters will go, which is really good for those going to Benson as or Odiham. The assessment has been decimated as well, but some may see that as a good thing. Less time will be spent on oxy, hyds and nitrogen. Undercarriage, engine and structural (which includes transparencys, aeriels and seals)inspections will loose all their theory content.

On the bright side they won't loose any drill, beliefs & values (god botherers), Ped and all the other trade unrelated bolarks that goes on.

In a nutshell you'll get AMMs with training deficiencys that the squadrons/training cells may well have to pick up/recover.

The best part of this fiasco being that the course will be delivered over 20 days. That's quite the norm though in todays climate, a 3 week course delivered over 4 weeks. If you ask me why not have a sensible idea and deliver a 4 week course over the 4 weeks? or am I just living in lala land?

Hm, I wonder who's office I may end up in sometime soon? Possibly some WO's who just doesn't listen to others and thinks Flight Sgts have no place asking them if they are settling in alright.

 

[sumps]

So as a breakdown, what is the length and type of training AMM's get?

 

[fat lazy techie]

Up untill recently the AMM training was to be over 24 weeks, with 4 being on the line and at least 5 filled with niff naff and trivia (Guard, R&I, FDTS, Leave, Admin). That leaves about 13 weeks to learn basic spannering and how to trade assist. I'll get a more recent brakedown soon, I hope, and may well post it on the goat (or just give a rough outline for everyones benefit). The next three AMM courses to go through the line are being used to trial the latest incarnation of the 15 day package spread over 20 days. Let's watch that failure rate shall we?:S

 

[HollyHopster]

from another perspective...

from another perspective...

Hi i have just come across this thread having a browse about and although my opinion may not be very important as i have only been in the RAF nearly a year, you may not agree but just so you can see things from my side i thought i would just mention...

I passed out of Cosford in January having completed the "longer course" just before they shortened it. It seems stupid that the Saudis and the W-Techs get longer line training than the AMMs first of all. From what i heard the "new - shorter course" has had some of the irrelevant stuff taken out which could be good because theres no point brain swamping the students when they will be taugh alot (if not most) again when they get on training cell on the "proper" aircraft.

however...if they are going to shorten any part of the course they could do away with the 4 periods of FDTS (x7 times!) (which was ok sometimes but more bearable i think in smaller doses...) 3 sessions of PT a week was good because it helps break up the course so its not just solid classroom stuff however it could have been less if they want to fit more Line stuff in.... R&I was one of the best weeks at Cosford i think they needs to stay for morale purposes. The Fairy stuff taught by Civvies could be shortened to 1-2 days of overviews of radars etc. rather than a week of in depth stuff which most of us forgot... and although the Rects phase was the most enjoyable part of my time at Cosford and i learnt alot of skills here, it was mainly Mech stuff for 2 weeks then about 3-4 days of Fairy/other stuff and they could have maybe made it just 10 days maybe. I suppose the focus really should be on 1st line servcing and any important rects stuff again could be taught when we get put on out squadrons and help out on Trade work.

but in a nutshell... The Line phase helps with gaining confidence with the aircraft and its not worth rushing it ... but on the other side, i got posted to my first squadron, now learning 1 man servicings and see offs in a completely different way and fully in depth with the relevant (and New!) aircraft. Most of what i learnt on the Line phase is now not relevant (e.g JP specific) Cosford serves its purpose as "Basic Training" but if more time is to be spent anywhere it could be in the "real" squadrons. My training experience so far has been great because they dont let you loose until you're really ready...theres no time limit to "pass out" and its one on one teaching.

The quality of AMMs passing out of Cosford is directly linked to AFCO's and RTS Halton... and i have seen a fair few mongs slipping through their nets.... I dont think shortening the line phase will mean these mongs are going to get even worse. they should have been filtered before and if there are some people who need extra help they should be highlighted and if so helped before they pass out. At the end of the day you cant tell what someones going to be like until they do it for real. Its the attitude that matters and although alot of them were pretty good (that i know of) i think the younger ones come across sometimes as not having the right attitude...when really its because they have no real job/social experience working with people. Maybe the age thing could be looked at i'm not sure though.

anyway thats just my thoughts having experienced it first hand.

 

[davie77]

Im sorry but if they are going to be a FLM then 2 weeks is not enough, I just dont think we have the same standard of applicant joining up these days....not by a long shot. A minimum of 4 weeks.

 

[Captain Gatso]

Hi there HH.

Welome to the goat. It's good to see that you let us know what the current workings of an AMM's course is like, from the prespective of a trainee. But D77 is right. The course is not long enough to give confidence to a new bod, on a normal working squadrons Aircraft type. What FLT was on about, was that the squadron line training bods were going to have to take up more of the teaching modules, that should have to be done at Cosford which in my opinion is not on. I started out in the airforce as a MECH, which really is an AMM. However I had to spend over a year at cosford learning the basics of my trade, which I think, just coverd me for when I went out to the big wide world of the RAF. I spent two weeks on a line course, on my first squadron which was enough to introduce me to what was what on the Aircraft type. Even then I was still 100%supervised for around six months after that. There are not enough training folks on the squadrons to take up the slack from Cosford, even when I was still in the RAF, about a few weeks ago. As every techie is at a premium at the moment. I know it's not your fault HH, your only saying how it is. But Cosford's heirachy are playing a dangerous game here. How much can you shave off a training course, that could have potentially fatal consequences, if an undertrained AMM could not be 100% supervised, and screws up, because the line NCO was trying to sort out line snags on another aircraft at the same time. Just an example, but where could it end.DT_Xtremez_09:

 

[fat lazy techie]

Latest update from the pit face. AMM training is 24 weeks. Of that at least 10 weeks is non relevant to the trade and only 4 is doing a 3 week generic and contextual line training phase. To break down what is bieng done on the rects phase I shall give you an idea. 3/4 of a day on a mag plug change, 3/4 of a day on a filter change. Anyone see a pattern forming? I strongly advise all training cell personnel get up to tossford and see what's going on. You may have had someone phone you up recently but I think he's taken your answers out of context. If you don't then don't say I didn't warn you.

 

[Sospan]

Latest update from the pit face. AMM training is 24 weeks. Of that at least 10 weeks is non relevant to the trade and only 4 is doing a 3 week generic and contextual line training phase. To break down what is bieng done on the rects phase I shall give you an idea. 3/4 of a day on a mag plug change, 3/4 of a day on a filter change. Anyone see a pattern forming? I strongly advise all training cell personnel get up to tossford and see what's going on. You may have had someone phone you up recently but I think he's taken your answers out of context. If you don't then don't say I didn't warn you.

I am kind of coming around to the idea that AMM line training should be platform specific, it might go against everything this tread stands for but will AMMs every get posted from one type to another ?

 

[fat lazy techie]

The line training AMMs get is a generic course to give them the theory and a skills base to work safely in whatever 1st line environment and on whatever A/C type they should be posted to. Rather than just saying this is what we do they get the why we do it as well. It's better they get this right in a training environment first, is it not?

Still with the dilution of standards it'll make the transition to training by Metrix almost seamless as you won't realise you are getting utter $hite from DCAE St Athan (AKA the Welsh vote purchase) and it won't make them look so bad. Either that or I'm just a big old cynic.

 

[propersplitbrainme]

I am kind of coming around to the idea that AMM line training should be platform specific, it might go against everything this tread stands for but will AMMs every get posted from one type to another ?

The problem is Sos that by doing this you take away the baseline level of knowledge that every tradesman gets through basic training; individual training cells and maintenance schools will invariably deliver a slightly different flavour of training. The problem then is for the central training school to identify where the starting point is for delivering technician training - if everyone has had the same then we know where the baseline sits.
And there is another problem, one that often only manifests itself when there is a major incident. Over the years little bits of training have been tweezered, rather than axed wholesale like helicopter training was, out of the various courses on the basis that someone, somewhere believes we no longer need it, it can be done locally or on a PET course. OK, we no longer need to be teaching AVPIN starters and double-entry type 438 teleflex units, but recently we (the roayl we) have been instructed to put together a package to teach FRS couplings and seals because it slipped between the cracks a few years ago and hasn't been taught.
Now, can anyone guess why this subject has been put back in again?