RAF showcase Apache helicopter amid Libya rumours (at RAF Wattisham)

[You Sir, Name!]

Video: RAF showcase Apache helicopter amid Libya rumours - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/8536358/RAF-showcase-Apache-helicopter-amid-Libya-rumours.html)

Well done the RAF! :ok:;)

[ShyTorque]

That will be the new desert uniform too, then.....? :hmm:

[G-ARZG]

'RAF showcase....' err, aren't they Army helo's

[jamesdevice]

nice bit of psychological sabre-rattling after this weeks are they / aren't they press speculation

[Thud_and_Blunder]

11 minutes flash-to-bang from initial post to G-ARZG's reply - not bad! :ok:

[500N]

Considering the Telegraph Video clearly states "Army Air Corps Workshops"
with the Telegraph symbol to the RHS of this and the Telegraph reporter would have had to go on the Army base to get the video and interviews, a pretty stupid mistake.

[jamesdevice]

it now reads
"Apache helicopters showcased amid Libya rumours"
Someone on the Torygraph read this site?

[teeteringhead]

How hard would it be to have a defence correspondent who has at least in interest if not a background in HM Forces? ... rather than one who can see into the future .......? ;)

Gets coat, body armour etc; dives into slit trench .....

[jamesdevice]

an item from one of your favourite journalists (from a couple of weeks ago)
US Navy produces smart, cheap 6kg fire+forget missile ? The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05/12/navy_spits_out_6kg_fire_and_forget_missile/)

presumably would be nice to have on these Apaches? Whats the chances?

[Boslandew]

Many years of reading newspapers and watching TV has convinced me that there is no-one in journalism that has any real knowledge or understanding of the Services. The average reporter appears to assume that all helicopters are flown by the RAF or Navy and probably has no idea that the Army Air Corps even exists. The ignorance is widespread, for example, no-one in Fleet Street gives any evidence of knowing the difference between a rank and an appointment?

That seems to apply to so many areas of life and explains why journalists are generally rated below even estate agents and politicians in the credibility stakes. It isn't about the facts and the truth, its purely about selling papers and enhancing reputations

[500N]

"Many years of reading newspapers and watching TV has convinced me that there is no-one in journalism that has any real knowledge or understanding of the Services."

no-one in journalism that has any real knowledge or understanding of ANYTHING

Except maybe the Royals where they seem to have dedicated people
so why can't they do the same for

And with Google / the internet available, it takes 30 seconds to look things up
to confirm accuracy of information so even less excuses.

.

[Garysted]

Gents,

I was at this presentation and the very first item on the briefing for the media was that this airfield is no longer RAF Wattisham, and has not been for about 17 years. There is no excuse for still making that mistake.

Mind you, OC AH Force's Wattisham history is a little dodgy, don't think treble one looped 21 Hunters...

Gary

[Pontius Navigator]

no-one in journalism that has any real knowledge or understanding of ANYTHING

Except maybe the Royals where they seem to have dedicated people

You only think you know these dedicated people get it right because you know no different.

Remember Prince Charles's comment:

When BBC Royal correspondent Nicholas Witchell asked Prince Charles about his feelings in the run-up to his wedding to Camilla Parker Bowles on 8 April in Windsor, he was given a terse reply.

"I am very glad you have heard of it, anyway," the prince said.

He added quietly to Prince William and Harry: "These bloody people. I can't bear that man. I mean, he's so awful, he really is."

Jenni Bond was also miffed at one point. She thought as the BBC's Royal Correspondent and therefore the (IHO) premier reporter was also snubbed and treated no differently from the rest of the ........

PS,

I remember one torygraph article, good half page, wonderfully explicit graphics, accurate to a T. Shortly afterwards I was talking to our media man at the Ministry (a real one wg cdr) and commented on it. He said the whole article was written and prepared by the RAF Media Comms and printed exactly by the torygraph with not one hint or acknowledgement.

Believe what youn read in the press at your peril. No different from politicians. All they want is personal kudos, more pay, and to sell papers.

[RedhillPhil]

Was at the Chelsea flower show yesterday afternoon when two Apaches went clattering over.

[500N]

PN
Totally agree.

I think my comment came across the wrong way.

The emphasis was they have dedicated people on the Royal's
- who do know a fair bit but not everything - where as they don't
seem to have dedicated Defense reporters.

Then again, after listening to James Whitaker recently who thinks he is so high and mighty,
my estimation of them has gone down. What is it with him ?

[Fareastdriver]

There used to have a 'defence corrospondent' who worked for the Daily Express. He used to prowl the bars around the various defence ministries and then come back and write some real howlers. One of these was where he heard about the Valiant rear seat ejection trials. They were nothing to do with V force rear crew so he drummed up this story about 'broadsides of paratroopers being launched from Brittanias and VC10s.'

[Wizzard]

Mind you, OC AH Force's Wattisham history is a little dodgy, don't think treble one looped 21 Hunters...

You're right, it was 22 Hunters at the '58 Farnborough show.

[Two's in]

Well, if we are turning this into a pedants corner to illustrate the complete lack of basic fact finding by yet another media outlet, note that there is no "Army Air Corps Workshop" at Wattisham, but there is a very professional organisation known as 7 Air Assault Battalion Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers, who maintain and overhaul these aircraft.