Those members who made their way to Culdrose on Thursday 20 September were rewarded by a most informative and enjoyable two days. The visit was blessed by very favourable weather with light winds and it was generally warm and sunny after the morning mist lifted. 7 aircraft flew in (Michael & Eve Bonham-Cozens with Michael Ryan & Peter Steel in Bonanza G-MAPR, Philip & Anne Cardew in Cessna 182 G-BGPA, Roger & Carol Bunbury in Cessna 172 G-BZZD, Pat & Jacqueline Mountain in PA-28 G-AXIR, Nigel de Candole & Robert Turner in Jodel 120A G-AVLY, Phil & Sue Moore in Auster G-ASZE, and Leo Baker in Cub G-BRLI.). After refuelling the aircraft the flyers were taken to the wardroom for personal refuelling in the bar, hosted by the Commander, where those arriving by road and rail joined them. Members of the FAAOA including some within the Committee also joined members of the Squadron.

After lunch, the inner man, and woman, being restored we were addressed by the Commodore of Culdrose, Chris Waite, who said that we were no doubt wondering how the attack on the World Trade Centre was affecting business at Culdrose? The answer he said was that there was 'little change' because 'asymmetric warfare', i.e. coping with rogue states who used terrorist attacks against nations they couldn't hope to match in conventional combat, was very much RNAS Culdrose's line of business. In fact Exercise SAIF SAREEA, which had been in the process of planning for the last 2 years, 'is exactly in the business required: projecting power ashore'. The Commodore reviewed the training programme at Culdrose. The Sea King Mk 6 is to be run down soon in favour of Merlin while the existing AEW capability (Sea King Mk.2) is to be superseded by the Sea King Mk.7. The latter aircraft differs little in external appearance from the former but is a 'huge step forward in AEW capability'. The Merlin is 'an exceptional aircraft' with radar with full pulse Doppler capability, dipping sonar and Link 11. It provides a 'stunningly good picture'. The aircraft has not always had a good press, and there are problems with spares and modifications, but, as the Commodore remarked, it is a peculiarly British habit to spend 95% of the time talking about the 5% which is wrong rather than the 95% which is right.

Aircrew shortages were discussed. There are sufficient volunteers entering but the training pipeline is too narrow for them to be brought forward at the required rate. To encourage volunteers to come forward in numbers, which enable the navy to pick the best from a large pool it, was desirable to get into schools to sell the navy but this was difficult. It was somewhat frivolously suggested that if drug peddlers could get into schools the Navy ought to be able to! [An attitude all too common in the educational establishment, and difficult to overcome when so few civilians have experience of the armed services, was crystallised in a conversation with a young observer in the bar later that evening whose parents were both university lecturers. They were upset at their son joining the navy, his father asking: 'How can you join "a killing machine?" '!]

Another obstacle to aircrew recruitment is that the schools are very mindful of league tables and therefore wish to send as many of their pupils as possible to university. In an endeavour to overcome this obstacle a scheme is under development for an in-service degree: the theme being 'have fun flying with the navy while getting a degree.' The In-Service Degree Scheme for RN aircrew was launched at the Armed Forces Career Convention at Sandhurst last September and there is a write up of the scheme in the October issue of the Navy News. Notwithstanding the problems of initial recruitment the most serious shortages of aircrew are in the 33-38 age group and it is critically important to hang on to these experienced personnel. The PVR rate for these has got to be reduced and a scheme of civilian accreditation for their skills, and financial incentives, to encourage them to remain in the service, are in hand.

The future of the flying scholarship scheme was discussed and it seems likely that in future these candidates will be taken up by the Roborough flight - 727 Squadron. The gliding scholarships part funded by the FAAOA were mentioned as being very successful in generating enthusiasm, and an encouraging measure of subsequent interest in joining the navy.

The afternoon concluded with a visit to 849 Squadron where the CO gave a talk on the Squadron's organisation, training and equipment. There are 3 Sea Kings in each Flight; A & B Flights are embarked in CVSs; 849 HQ Flight undertakes trials & training; having 10 observers & 5 pilots. The Sea King Mk.7 represents a major advance in AEW capability over the Sea King Mk. 2. The latter is based on a radar fit put together in 6 weeks under the pressures of the Falklands War, and in particular the sinking of HMS Sheffield. The former is based on the Searchwater 2000 AEW designed for the job. The Sea King Mk.2 system is highly 'mandraulic', basically 'greasy pencils', and cannot see overland, while the Mk.7 is highly automated, has a radar of reduced weight and increased transmitter power, almost double the range, pulse/pulse Doppler, and auto air tracking. A comprehensive communications suite is fitted including Link 16 which will give a data transfer capability to other units, including other aircraft, such as the F16 and Sea Harrier. The In Service Date for the Mk.7 is March 2002 and the Initial Operational Capability September 2002. Training starts September 2001. Sea King Mk.7 will provide airborne surveillance & control, no longer solely an organic asset it will also be a key asset to the Joint Force Commander.

At 1800 the visitors foregathered in the bar, the Commander having previously informed them they had kindly, if unknowingly (!), laid on a barrel of beer to trigger a party. This gave us a welcome opportunity to talk to serving members of the Fleet Air Arm over a drink and subsequently at dinner, and again in the bar afterwards. After sampling rather more port than may have been prudent we departed to our accommodation, some in the mess, some in surrounding hotels and B & Bs. Some members appeared next morning with port seemingly seeping into their eye sockets.

Next morning began with a talk on the Merlin by the CO of 824 Squadron. The squadron has 8 Merlins. A 3-man crew operates the Merlin and each crew is trained as a team. There are 4 crews on each course and 3 courses per year. The CVSs will have 6 Merlins and the Type 23 will have one - to date only HMS Lancaster has been so equipped. The AOR will have 5 of which 3 only will be accommodated in the hangar. Merlin has a much larger surveillance area than its predecessors, is equipped with an active sonar with a fast dip cycle (it has a 'flyable' body), a passive sonar capable of monitoring a large number of buoys, a targeting capability for Harpoon via Link 11, and the aircraft can be reconfigured in a variety of trooping roles (12 or 20 troops) and for Casevac. We were shown the area coverage of the aircraft system and its sensors, and the quality of the picture, and we were left in no doubt that Merlin represents a huge step forward in capability.

The talk was followed by a visit to the hangar to inspect a Merlin. At 15 tons it is of impressive size but, with its wide chord main rotor blades with their distinctive tips, it has a smaller rotor diameter than the Sea King. Flight power is provided by 3 Rolls Royce engines but it also has an APU which enables the aircraft to be powered up, e.g. for maintenance purposes, without running the flight engines; it has an all 'glass cockpit' and is reported by the crews as being very easy to fly and vibration free. Although the aircraft is dual control it is normally flown by one pilot, the observer and aircrewman sitting (facing aft) at a console behind the cockpit. There is also provision in the main cabin for a sonar console and 2 carousels for dispensing sonar buoys. It is equipped with emergency flotation gear but this is only designed to keep the aircraft afloat for long enough for successful crew egress. However with 3 very reliable engines of more than adequate power, 2 of which can sustain the aircraft in the hover, ditching should be rare. [The cause of the only ditching to date has not been officially promulgated but it does not appear to be due to a defect in the Merlin.]

From the hangar we walked to the Merlin Training Facility. This is incorporated in a purpose built building, which includes a dynamic flight simulator (its external shape resembling a hot air balloon on jacks), supplemented by static cockpit procedures trainers and replica aircraft, part mock-up, part real aircraft, for maintainer training. Additionally there are a variety of computer based training aids. Training on these is designed to be supplemented by an instructor. Principles underlying the training philosophy are that insofar as possible the same training aids should be used by both aircrew and maintainers, they should be usable not only for initial instruction but also for refresher training, e.g. for rehearsal of a job before doing it on, and possibly damaging, a real aircraft, and that nothing should be taught that isn't essential to the performance of an individual's task. Irrespective of past attitudes viz. that aircrew and maintainers should ideally know everything there is to know about their aircraft, the new approach has been dictated by the sheer complexity of Merlin and its systems. [The traditional approach would lead to impossibly long training times, and impasse when students started forgetting what they had learnt earlier as they attempted to absorb new material.]

This concluded a most interesting morning at the end of which few could fail to be impressed by the size, complexity, capability and future potential of Merlin.

After adjourning to the bar, where Rear Admiral Colin Cooke-Priest expressed our thanks to our hosts for a most rewarding visit, we had lunch in the wardroom before departing, the fliers performing a stream take-off at 20 second intervals. Thus concluded a visit at the end of which few could fail to have been impressed by what they had seen and to have enhanced confidence in the future of the Fleet Air Arm.

A report by Roger Richardson-Bunbury.