No doubt the RAF/MOD are paying through the nose for a civilian company to maintain the aircraft. Instead of employing enough RAF techies in the 1st place.
@@jjsmallpiece9234 Possibly not but what is paid to Air Tanker is governed by a contract so there is an inbuilt control. And I suspect the extra cost (if any) of these specialists is more than funded by the fact the RAF didn't have to buy these 14 aircraft. They lease them on an 'hours used' basis.
You're missing the point. It's always, always down to a frontline capable head count. Each Air Tanker employee is one less RAF Airman. RAF Airmen and Officers are multi-tasked. Air Tanker is not. Comparing money saved by using a civilian contractor to using a military squadron only ever covers the aircraft. There is so much more beyond that. Will Air Tanker receive military medals? It's all about money, and your government is poorly cutting the Defence cloth.@@1chish
@@mylovelybeard Noty sure I missed the point at all. Its all about overall cost not who does what. As for 'cutting the Defence cloth' sorry but the UK Government has been steadily increasing the Defence Budget. Its still the 2nd largest in NATO. And why say 'your Government'? if you aren't British I doubt you have a clue how this contract operates. On a separate point Air Tanker staff (pilots and maintainers) are mostly RAF Reservists so they do two jobs. For example when a Voyager is tasked for an RAF operation the pilot will likely be an Air Tanker Reservist in RAF blues who was the previous day flying one of the 'surge' Voyagers on a holiday flight in Civvies. The arrangement is remarkably flexible and over the life of the aircraft very cost effective.
No doubt the RAF/MOD are paying through the nose for a civilian company to maintain the aircraft. Instead of employing enough RAF techies in the 1st place.
Erm air tanker… that’s a civilian airline that own the voyagers
@@casparthomas4775 Yes, your point is? They certainly won't be working for nothing or at the same rate the RAF would pay a techie.
@@jjsmallpiece9234 Possibly not but what is paid to Air Tanker is governed by a contract so there is an inbuilt control.
And I suspect the extra cost (if any) of these specialists is more than funded by the fact the RAF didn't have to buy these 14 aircraft. They lease them on an 'hours used' basis.
You're missing the point. It's always, always down to a frontline capable head count. Each Air Tanker employee is one less RAF Airman. RAF Airmen and Officers are multi-tasked. Air Tanker is not. Comparing money saved by using a civilian contractor to using a military squadron only ever covers the aircraft. There is so much more beyond that. Will Air Tanker receive military medals? It's all about money, and your government is poorly cutting the Defence cloth.@@1chish
@@mylovelybeard Noty sure I missed the point at all. Its all about overall cost not who does what.
As for 'cutting the Defence cloth' sorry but the UK Government has been steadily increasing the Defence Budget. Its still the 2nd largest in NATO. And why say 'your Government'? if you aren't British I doubt you have a clue how this contract operates.
On a separate point Air Tanker staff (pilots and maintainers) are mostly RAF Reservists so they do two jobs. For example when a Voyager is tasked for an RAF operation the pilot will likely be an Air Tanker Reservist in RAF blues who was the previous day flying one of the 'surge' Voyagers on a holiday flight in Civvies.
The arrangement is remarkably flexible and over the life of the aircraft very cost effective.
if sponsored reservists works, great.
it would do my head in.
Good job guys. I’ve been to Brize Norton, on a USAF C-5 Galaxy, over 20 years ago. I’m retired now!
God bless you all. Have fun and work hard.
Trying for movement controller myself in the RLC.
I don’t think forces news covers the RAF much compared to Army/Navy
Its nothing new its the Governments way to to run the Airforce cheaper with contractors. They did it on other platforms.
Iraq on Op Pitting…