See what the general feeling is on the subject
I think you are right.......................... did I just say that! :shock:RAF_Eng said:In my opinion, the whole JFH concept went wrong when we tried to form predominantly RN and predominantly RAF Sqns. You then end up with no Matelots wanting to go on the RAF Sqns and no crabs wanting to go on a Matelot Sqn. This applies equally to Groundcrew and Aircrew. The same concept that has been used on 20 Sqn should have been used on all Sqns with a 50/50 mix - yes it has been/ probably is still very painful on 20 Sqn but it has forced through totally integrated working. I know the original thought was to let the RN Sqns do most of the boat work and the RAF do land based stuff but with the current Ops tempo when are we likely to achieve that? I think it is the Sqn names that have caused the problem and they should have just formed 4 new JFH Sqns with completely new numbers. Surely we're too small today to get hung up on the historical importance of Sqn names?
I'll go before I'm reminded the RAF is too young to have traditions, only habits!
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|Press release: Investment boss banned after misappropriating client's £800,000||MoD News||0|
|Press release: Lord Ahmad pledges £800,000 for women’s peacebuilding||MoD News||0|
|Press release: Illegal fishing costs 3 men more than £1,800||MoD News||0|