RAF News/Propaganda...?

[Grabbers]

I have recently noticed the front page of the RAF News. Big headline of how a GR4 flew low and fast saving the day in Iraq. Fair enough one might say. What did 'irk' me was the tiny picture of RAF Regt Flt Lt who won a gallantry award in Afghanistan.
Whilst not wishing to devalue the contribution of the two aviators, it strikes me as a much more headline and newsworthy tale was 'bumped' in their favour.
Maybe I am missing the point but is the RAF News trotting out propoganda to justify the continued use/abuse of Defence Budget cash on loud but ultimately useless Fast Jets?
For the record I am not RAF Regt.
Any thoughts?

[JessTheDog]

I always thought RAF News had more spin and less substance than the sister Service publications, although the Army seem to complain a lot about Soldier. Navy News always seemed to have a bit more debate in it.

[Roguedent]

Soft, Strong and throughly absorbing:D:D

[LateArmLive]

I think you'll find the story about the RAF Regt guy has had more covertime than most stories over the past few months.
Ultimately useless Fast Jets? Tw@t. :mad:

[Roguedent]

I've just been asked to design a new front cover for the next issue of RAF News. I was thinking about a Nobel Tommy standing over a hun whilst a nun watches on:confused:

For the record, this is a pointless thread. It sounds like a rant to me, but a personnel one, that has no discussion points at all!!:ugh:

[Chris Kebab]

You started off making a reasonable point Grabbers and then shot yourself clean out of the sky with a utterly trite and banal final point on which I fully agree with latearmlive.

[XferSymbol]

Another thread with just enough of a controversial starting post to generate some pointless argument between separate trades within the RAF.

Although I have no experience of the Navy equivalent, RAF News is much ****ter than Soldier, and that is proper ****.

:hmm: Wonder how long this one will run for........

[Grabbers]

All
I had no intention in starting a trade 'x' against trade 'y' argument. I was alluding to the possible editorial control over the RAF News by those higher up the food chain. There is considerable debate as to the value of Typhoon and/or JSF. It appeared to me that the publicity given to the GR4 incident was a little disproportionate.
And other than shoehorn themselves onto the odd coalition mission to maintain an appearance of the 'Special Relationship', what do UK FJs bring to the party? Not trying to start a row, just an honest question.

[Tappers Dad]

Perhaps this thread should be merged with The RAF is Knackered & Nimrod Information / Panorama Mon 4th June (Merged) .

I am sure an example of RAF Propaganda will be seen tomorrow night when Sir Glenn Torpy says "there are no underlying themes".
Er aren't there ?
1 they are all Nimrods
2 They all appear to be connected with fuel
3 if there is no connection that means there are a lot of different things wrong .

I don't know which is the most worrying.

[LOTA]

Grabbers wrote:

Whilst not wishing to devalue the contribution of the two aviators, it strikes me as a much more headline and newsworthy tale was 'bumped' in their favour.


The story of the Regiment officer's bravery first appeared on the front page of RAF News in its January 5, 2007, edition under the headline: Matt wins a Military Cross in Afghanistan. So in this case the Tornado boys story was probably a bit newsworthy as the Regiment officer was receiving his gong at the palace.

As for the respective merits of Soldier, Navy News, RAF News etc, I don't think there's much between em except Soldier carries more letters (probably coz the army is bigger!) and every letter in Navy News seems to be from an old-timer!

[Grabbers]

LOTA
I did not know that as I was in the Sandpit Jan 5th. Perhaps the conspiracy is really only in my head.

[betty swallox]

Tappers Dad,
This is not meant as personal swipe; I knew most of the guys in the Sep 06 accident very well, but I'm not convinced getting the Nimrod into this thread is particularly helpful. We all have our opinions (so wish we could all wait till the BOI reports)...I feel dragging XV230 on this thread is uncalled for.
Meant in the best intention
bs

[Wrathmonk]

Stand by Betty - it won't be long before WEBF pitches in with a random (spurioius) link to the Future Carrier and Sea Jet threads. After all, it was RAF propaganda that has put paid to both (almost) of these projects!:p

Back to thread - much of the input to RAF News comes from the units themselves. The more you shout the more you are heard. Brize and Odiham seem to be particularly good at them as dis a certain Norfolk Fin sqn under a previous CO.....

And to be fair to the RAF News they don't shy away from publishing letters that cause discomfort to some staff officers - of note some of the Pay 2000 and JPA "digs" were well focussed on the issues at hand and more likely to be read by VSO than some of the sensationalist drivel on these pages.

Seems to me if you have an issue with the RAF News then write to the editor. They may even withold your name if you ask them nicely. Remember though, to give fair balance, next time one of the Mods steps out of line on the PPRuNe Military Aircrew Forum write to the RAF News to complain.:E

Is it really Monday tomorrow!

[Air Defender]

Aka "raf Lies":e

[Double Zero]

Roguedent,

Was that a personnel or personal rant ?

Either way you will be lucky to even work for the 'Sun' in future at that rate...

I've just been mildly chastised ( thanks, at least you were reasonable even if we fail to agree ! ) for mentioning the Tornado & Jag' are useless as stated earlier - in fact I would say the Tornado GR4 is just about becoming useful, in a non air-threat environment, for the first time in it's life - the original item would not have lasted a minute in WW2.

How about going around photographing married quarters & detailing the occupant's comments, or interviewing people in the sandpit in a truly anonymous non career-threatening way ?

That would show an unbiased point of view...

[Maple 01]

the Tornado GR4 is just about becoming useful, in a non air-threat environment, for the first time in it's life - the original item would not have lasted a minute in WW2.

Sorry, I can't even think why anyone would come out with tripe like that, care to expand on your theory?

[FFP]

Leave Rodders alone ! Not his fault he didn't go to Uni ...;)

[stickmonkeytamer]

What was quite entertaining in the latest copy of the RAF News (well the latest I saw as I'm OOA) for me was reading the letters page. In it was a letter from an RAF Cpl, who seemingly wanted to know where he could get a copy of the RAF bikini... for his girlfriend! His name and address had been "withheld". Initially, most people would just carry on and read the next letter, or see who they know in the photos this time.

However, little birdy on the "inside" of the publication had already told me that this letter was made up to try and bolster sales of the emblazoned clothes. Not very impressive!!!

Oh, quick, run! The black transit van is pulling up outside my tent.

SMT

[Double Zero]

Maple 01,

simple really - fly low over a prime target merrily chucking out JP233, and strange as it may seem, Skyshadow etc does not generate a Star-Trek like force field, and the locals may be naughty enough to fire bullets & shells.

Quite a few a few more than necessary unlucky sods from the first night of GW1 should tell you that.

What do you think the Germans would have done in WW2 if a Tornado attacked an airfield or prime site ?

Thrown a lot of lead in the air, radar guided & mostly not, then shot the bloody thing out of the sky...

The Americans learned that in Vietnam.

[samuraimatt]

Stand by Betty - it won't be long before WEBF pitches in with a random (spurioius) link to the Future Carrier and Sea Jet threads.

Don't forget the link to the Vulcan, stable belts, loss of free food, and of course we mustn't forget the MOVERS!!!:ok:

[LOTA]

Stickmonkeytamer wrote:

In it was a letter from an RAF Cpl, who seemingly wanted to know where he could get a copy of the RAF bikini... for his girlfriend! His name and address had been "withheld". Initially, most people would just carry on and read the next letter, or see who they know in the photos this time.

However, little birdy on the "inside" of the publication had already told me that this letter was made up to try and bolster sales of the emblazoned clothes. Not very impressive!!!


Not true, SMT, it was a genuine letter and used coz the editor wanted another excuse to use the picture of the girl in the bikini!

[spectre150]

And other than shoehorn themselves onto the odd coalition mission to maintain an appearance of the 'Special Relationship', what do UK FJs bring to the party? Not trying to start a row, just an honest question.

Is this a serious question? I am nothing to do wth the Harrier Force but I am pretty sure that their det in AFG does more than shoe themselves onto the odd coalition mission to maintain an appearance of the SR.

Your original thread questioned spending money on useless FJs (I think you used the other u word too) - until something else comes along (developed UAVs perhaps away in the future) FJs are required to do a number of jobs including responding quickly to CAS requests or other support to TIC. All aircraft have an Out Of Service date (we just lost the Jags) and the procurement process takes years to bring replacements into Service. I would be interested in your alternative proposal to maintain those capabilities for the current ops and potential future ones, Grabber.

[nav attacking]

Well the MRA4 would have done the job if it had been brought in on time. 14hr loiter, self designating just not cleared for the weapons.

Oh, and not in service....still!!!

Even the current MR2 could still be equipped to self designate and with the largest bomb bay in the RAF...

Maybe we will bring the old lady back into service when the Argies invade again!