Take annual reports seriously:

 

Have your say

Preference will be given to letters under 300 words. Correspondents must include their name and address. Send letters to: The Editor, Air Force News, R8-LG-043, Russell Offices, Canberra, ACT, 2600; or raafnews@defencenews.gov.au (note that this is not part of the internal defence network)

AS I prepare to leave the Air Force after serving for almost 24 years, I would just like to impart some words of wisdom to the newer and younger members.

Shortly you will have an annual report (PAR) raised to evaluate your performance over the past 12 months.

If you intend making the Air Force your long-term career then I implore you not to do what I did in my younger days. Treat every report raised on you as one of the most important things you can have done during your career.

My mistake for the first few years was not to take these reports seriously. In fact I actually treated them like I used to with a school report – ho hum another report.

The effect this has had on my career has been rather dramatic in that I am still an LAC after (as you can see) a considerable amount of time in the Air Force; in fact I have spent more than half my life in the service.

The best thing you can do is keep a diary noting your achievements throughout the year as you can be almost certain the member raising your report will not remember most of what you have done. It is up to you to keep your records – don’t rely on anybody else doing it for you!

If you think your marks are not what you perceive them to be, discuss the issues in question with your assessor, bring your diary to your interview so that if your assessor has forgotten something you can jog his or her memory.

One of the best things you can do to assist yourself in understanding how the reporting system works and how your assessor will be allocating your marks is to read all the information you can about the reporting system. Type in PAR in the search engine and read anything you think is relevant to you.

Evaluate yourself honestly so that you know how you expect your report to look.

Once your report has gone off the unit and made its way to DEFAIR it is too late to start rebuttal cases as nine times out of 10 you will not get the satisfaction you seek.

Finally, you may think this is written by a disgruntled airman, bitter at not being promoted; well the answer to that is yes and no.

Yes, I am disappointed that I have not achieved what I set out to do almost 24 years ago. No, if I had my chance again, I would definitely do things differently.

For a start I would listen to my supervisors and do as they ask – don’t question everything. Most times you may think your supervisor is asking you to do things you don’t want to do or don’t think you should, but your supervisor has years of experience is not asking you to do something they themselves either would not do or have not done.

LAC Robert Smith
SPLR 2
RAAF Base Tindal.

Memories triggered

Ric Havyatt defuses a Japanese bomb during World War II.

I WAS interested in your article “Big bang theory” in the Air Force News of February 13.

I was involved in this type of work during World War II with the RAAF and served in Darwin in 1942-3 and in New Guinea during 1945.

In those days we were known as Bomb Disposal Units, and I was OC No. 6 BDU and No.52 OBU Darwin from May 1942 to June 1943.

The first bomb disposal course was in April 1942 with three officers and about 24 airmen. Other courses followed, but I don’t know how many in total were trained to do this work.

Bomb Disposal Officers that I remember were Flight Lieutenants Brett Shepherd, Frank Weaver, Harry Belcher, Maurice Dunkley and Taylor. Each BDU had about 10 or 12 airmen and the initial squads were sent to Darwin (me), Port Moresby (Brett Shepherd) and Townsville, but I don’t remember who the BDO was for Townsville.

The accompanying photograph is of me getting ready to extract the fuse from a 60kg Japanese bomb which we had uncovered at about 13ft. The bombs were armed in flight by a propeller on the front of the fuse which moved the cap forward and allowed the striker to come back on to the detonator when the bomb struck the ground.

Sometimes the bombs failed to arm, which is the case with this one. Others tumbled in flight, and if they landed flat on their belly, failed to explode. We got several of these.

The bombs on Darwin were either 60kg or 250kg HE, with an occasional 60kg incendiary thrown in. The explosive material in the HE bombs was hexanitrodiphenylamine, yellow in colour, and stained our skin on contact.

An item on bomb disposal activities appeared in a WWII RAAF publication called Wings, dated June 12, 1945. This included a short description of a mission in which I was involved to locate Japanese bombs and fuses, together with a photograph of some recovered bombs.

I hesitate to state the reason for this mission, but the fact was that the Air Force was short of bombs at the time and resorted to using Japanese bombs against the Japanese at Wewak from the RAAF base at Tadji. For one reason or another the bombs were not particularly successful as many of them failed to explode.

Our aims and objectives were much the same as those listed under “Responsibilities” in your article, although our civilian contact was minimal owing to the fact that we were in war zones most of the time.

Our responsibilities also involved disposing of surplus bomb dumps in NG after hostilities ceased, and my biggest one was 34 tons in one big bang.

In between my two stints in war zones, I was an instructor at Air Armament and Gas School, Nhill, in bomb disposal, but this was part of the course for armourers, and I doubt if any of them ever got into disposing any of the bombs they handled.

There were no fatalities among our WWII bomb disposal personnel, although there were a few accidents causing injuries to those involved.

Our ranks are pretty thin now, and most of those whom I knew are no longer with us.

Thanks for an interesting article on a subject which is still much the same as we knew it.

Ric Havyatt
Woolwich, New South Wales

Financial assistance pledged

OUR purpose in writing is to pass on the best wishes of the Australian Defence Credit Union team – board, management and staff – to all deploying personnel.

We wish them a successful deployment and a safe and speedy return.

This is something very close to us, as some of our staff have spouses/partners deploying.
Australian Defence Credit Union exists solely to serve the members of the Australian Defence Force. We have helped may of them to organise their financial affairs pre deployment and will continue to provide assistance as required.

If, as a result of current events, circumstances arise whereby we may be able to confidentially assist with special needs at short notice you can be assured of our commitment to do so.

John Wood
Chairman
Jeffrey Johnson
Chief Executive Officer
ADCU

Relationship has a cost

AS a member who is currently in RA (rent assistance) accommodation I have recently discovered that should I make my fiancée a recognised dependant (de facto), I will be slugged an extra $46 a pay for contribution.

I haven’t moved house nor have I been promoted or had a pay increase. Why then should I be punished ( hardly a reward is it?) simply because I wish to have a recognised dependant?

I realise that my rent ceiling will increase as a result of this change of categorisation, but does that mean I will be entitled to removal to move into a better house? Somehow I don’t think so.

In fact, I’ve recently had a chat to DHA (Don’t Help Anyone) and they gave me the old “it’s a Defence policy, there’s nothing we can do about it” speech.

It’s a wonder that families are put under such stress because of these attitudes. Also for the readers’ information, the contributions for MWOD will be increasing again next year to be 90 per cent of the MWD contributions, so look out for a rent hike. Bet they won’t tell us that till it’s introduced.

SGT P. Holder
Defence Force School of Signals,
Simpson Barracks, Victoria

Official response from Ken Thornton,
Communication Manager, DHA:

The role of Defence Housing Authority is to provide housing in accordance with Defence policy. Over 15 years of operation DHA has significantly raised the standard of accommodation for ADF members. It remains a fact that the rent contributions and rent ceilings DHA apply derive from the Pay and Conditions Manual and that those figures are determined by Defence.

Your reader may be interested to know that from November 2002 to January 2003 DHA managed 8296 relocations with a low national complaint rate of 0.37 per cent. Also, our most recent Customer Satisfaction KPI across all relocation and tenancy services achieved the agreed Defence target of 75 per cent or greater, and in most cases was closer to 85 per cent.

.