Originally Posted by S-2

"'There is no question of training being compromised.'” However, she added: “'We have adapted our training in terms of our operational requirement and we’re taking action in terms of the manning challenges.'”

Yes. They're "taking action in terms of the manning challenges". However, to suggest that training of 28 weeks cut to 14 isn't a "compromise[d]" is ludicrous. Of course it is. If everything taught in 28 weeks could be taught in 14, that's the way it would always have been done.

This is serious change for the worse. How it can be viewed differently, I'm unsure.