BBC Dambuster flypast article

[B_Fawlty]

Imagine my surprise (or lack of it :hmm:) upon reading this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7404052.stm), especially the sentence
A Spitfire, a Hurricane, two Tornadoes and a Dakota transport plane - all from the present 617 Squadron - will join the fly-past.

Now not only is THAT what I call overstretch but does it also not set a new benchmark for multi-role squadrons? Some gonk in Whitehall must be exceedingly pleased with himself :}

Please excuse the apparent flippant tone regarding overstretch, it must be no laughing matter for those who have to endure it first hand.

[bazzacat]

You do have to wonder about "Defence Correspondents" in the BBC. A while back I was amused at an article about the F 35 Lightning 2 which had a picture, you guessed it, of the EE version with the caption "F 35 - the RAFs warplane of the future"! Likewise, before GW2, BBC placed 7 Armd Bde as being based in Bergen, Norway, as opposed to Bergen, Lower Saxony- armour in the mountains, yes that makes sense...

[S'land]

It seems that our esteemed journalist must visit PPRUNE. The article has been corrected.

[The Flying Pram]

Bit of thread drift maybe, but when I visited Coningsby some years back I was told that the Lancaster is the only heavy bomber on the RAF fleet!

[Melchett01]

Bit of thread drift maybe, but when I visited Coningsby some years back I was told that the Lancaster is the only heavy bomber on the RAF fleet!

Yes - I heard that too. Apparently BBMF's Lancaster still has to be declared as a long-range heavy bomber under the Conventional Forces Europe Treaty.

[blue monday]

Quote:
Bit of thread drift maybe, but when I visited Coningsby some years back I was told that the Lancaster is the only heavy bomber on the RAF fleet!
Yes - I heard that too. Apparently BBMF's Lancaster still has to be declared as a long-range heavy bomber under the Conventional Forces Europe Treaty

a few years back under CFE treaty or something similar at EGXE we had some east europeans visit and were being pedantic as they found an old, obviously wrecked saxon personel carrirer (on gaurding duties with the rocks if i remember rightly) and they wanted to see where it was declared

[exscribbler]

Does that mean VICTORY should be declared as a (line of) battleship in commission? :rolleyes:

[SirToppamHat]

Does that mean VICTORY should be declared as a (line of) battleship in commission?

Don't have my Treaty with me at home, but ISTR:

Ships aren't decared under CFE.

There is also no requirement for museum pieces and gate guardians to count towards the maxima allowed in each area (not that either group of states parties comes close these days), but there is a tendancy in the UK for us to leave them in annual data exchanges, so I am not surprised that inspectors want to see them.

STH