RAF Annual Review 2013

[CoffmanStarter]

It seems that it's not possible to download a PDF version as yet :ugh:

RAF Web Site Periodicals (http://www.raf.mod.uk/downloads/RAF%20Periodicals.cfm)

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/images-11_zpsce8c56ba.jpg

So whilst in W H Smiths this weekend I spied a large stack of the RAF Annual Review 2013 glossy hiding on the lower shelf next to Caravan Monthly. I duly parted with £4.99 and looked forward to a good read. I know these type of PR publications are designed to communicate with Jo Public ... but on the whole I felt it was a bit of a Curate's Egg :(

I'm sure there were some politics behind the scenes when the RAF took over responsibility from the publishers of the Royal Air Force Year Book ... But they just seemed to be much better ?

There again I may be guilty of making a comparison with the 1976 Year Book ... as it was full of aircraft ...

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/images-1-5_zps1bf4acbd.jpeg

Anyone else feel the same ?

Best ...

Coff.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

next to Caravan Monthly

Sounds about right........:{

UK Armed Forces 220,350
Camping and Caravanning Club membership 260,000

[Wensleydale]

Camping and Caravanning Club membership 260,000


They should be charged with "Loitering within Tent".

[Bob Viking]

Definitely a Grandad joke. Although it did cause the corners of my mouth to rise slightly.
BV:ok:

[CoffmanStarter]

Well done chaps ... :D

Now back to the thread ...

[The Old Fat One]

Now back to the thread ...

in what way were the replies thus far off thread :confused::confused::confused:

[Foghorn Leghorn]

Caravanning Club magazine is about right, as I heard some participants at Ex CQWI-12 had to stay in caravans!

[Alber Ratman]

Has "Air Cules" been binned again? Not one in public view since January 2012?? The budget chopper been at it again?

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

The RAF now 'Clue' less?

Sounds about right.

[CoffmanStarter]

Fox3 ... W H Smiths had some Top Shelf material just for you :ok:

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/image_zps67721ffc.jpg

[Courtney Mil]

I agree, Coff. The later publications lack so much compared to the years when there were so many different types and so much more going on. Perhaps even worse is looking at the RAF Publications web pages (your link) to see how out of date it all is. Doesn't really show the RAF in a great light, does it?

[CoffmanStarter]

AR ...

Has "Air Cules" been binned again ? Not one in public view since January 2012 ?? The budget chopper been at it again ?

I even understand that the goodly Wing Commander Spry has resorted to selling the Big Issue to supplement his pension :mad:

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/ScreenShot2011-12-18at110900.png

[howiehowie93]

I have a few of those old issues of the RAF yearbook. There are still articles that stick in my mind that were in them:

The Saga of Green Meat and the Clipped Wings and Cancelled spring to mind - I was on Tremblers at the time so the picture of the SR177 in my Sqns colours was very evocative at the time.

I stopped buying it when the quality went right down to something akin to a glossy Vauxhall Brochure !

[CoffmanStarter]

HH93 ...

Wow ... a SR177 in Tremblers colours ... I bet that looked a mean machine :ok:

[CoffmanStarter]

Airships combine ... Airships combine ...

RAF Periodicals Web Site (http://www.raf.mod.uk/downloads/RAF%20Periodicals.cfm)

Sir's ... Please do what you can to keep the RAF Periodicals Web Site updated with current material :ok:

It all looks a bit second rate at the moment ...

Your obedient servant ... etc. etc.

Coff.

[Willard Whyte]

Is the raf '13 review out 1/6 of the way through the year because the raf is 1/6 the size of a few years ago?

[Iansnorthernmonkey]

Just seen this thread having joined the forum searching for RAF News.

"I'm sure there were some politics behind the scenes when the RAF took over responsibility from the publishers of the Royal Air Force Year Book ... But they just seemed to be much better ?"

Point of order, the RAF Annual Review and the RAF Yearbook were/are two different publications. Latterly the yearbook was produced by the RAFCTE (was it always?) before stopping in 2011, and the Annual Review by Key Publishing, commencing in Nov 2008 with the 2009 edition.

[MAINJAFAD]

HH93 ...

Wow ... a SR177 in Tremblers colours ... I bet that looked a mean machine

Coff, did it ever!!!! Two SR-177's in 111 Sqn markings over flying some 41 Sqn Hawker P1081's (though the all of the aircraft were in standard 1950s day fighter scheme like a Hunter).

Built a model of it in those colours as well back in the early 1990s.

Somebody did put copies of the Wilf Hardy paintings from the Wings Clipped and Cancelled on the Net, but the hi res versions are gone. However type in 'RAF Yearbook 1976' on Google and then select images and the thumbnails of two paintings come up. The other is of a 74 Sqn Hawker P1121 and a 16 Sqn TSR 2.

Did anybody see the original run of the 1976 Yearbook, the one that caused the government at the time to suffer a sense of humour failure??

[Haraka]

Did anybody see the original run of the 1976 Yearbook, the one that caused the government at the time to suffer a sense of humour failure?

I haven't heard that one. Do tell.

[nutnurse]

Is this the real reason why Wislon resigned?

[Party Animal]

F3WMB,


UK Armed Forces 220,350



Really!!! Are you including all the MOD civil servants in that number?

On the subject of Year Books and Air Clues etc, I think its inevitable that they just cannot compete with things printed during the days of the Cold War. So many aircraft, sqns and personnel with the capacity to provide stories that could actually be talked about. Nowadays, we are so stretched, with so few of the above and so many live operations that cannot be opened up to Joe Public, its no wonder editors struggle to provide decent copy. Hey Ho!

[MAINJAFAD]

Haraka

According to Derek Wood in the 1990 reprint of 'Project Cancelled' (Chaper 16), The 1976 Yearbook had a couple articles that were very close to the bone as far as the MOD was concerned. The forward by the CAS at the time was removed and Wood's own article, 'Wings Clipped and Cancelled' had arbitrary changes done to it, plus other text changes were done throughout the publication. Wood doesn't say if the publication had already gone on sale, but he does say is that many thousands of copies were withdrawn and pulped.

[Haraka]

Many thanks MAINJAFAD
I certainly have ( or had) the '76 yearbook and remember the article on what the RAF might have had . I just wondered if there was any point in ransacking the archives to try to find it ......

[MAINJAFAD]

Haraka

The original text of 'Wings Clipped and Cancelled' from the 1976 yearbook is in the reprint of the 'Project Cancelled' book, it would be interesting to compare the two texts (unfortunately I lost my copy of the 76 yearbook years ago). I suspect the majority of the changes covered 1964/5 with the cancellation of TSR2, P1154 and the HS 681 and the purchase of the Phantom, Hercules and F-111K.

[CoffmanStarter]

Haraka, Mainjafad ...

Gents ... It would appear one still can acquire some back copies at responsible cost ... 1976 included (clearly with a premium) :ok:

RAF Yearbooks (http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_mPrRngCbx=1&_nkw=royal+air+force+yearbook)

Best ...

Coff.

PS. Mainjafad ... I can't seem to locate a pic of the SR-177's in Tremblers Colours at the moment ... anyone else had any luck ?

[MAINJAFAD]

Coff, looks something like this. The SR-177's are in 111 markings, though not that clear in this resolution of picture

http://thumbnails111.imagebam.com/35616/7e50e1356150886.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/7e50e1356150886)

And the Tiger P1121.

http://thumbnails111.imagebam.com/35616/cfa3d5356152097.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/cfa3d5356152097)

[CoffmanStarter]

Many thanks Mainjafad :ok:



SR-177 Projected Performance Data ...

Maximum speed: Mach 2.35
Service ceiling: 67,000 ft (20,422 m)
Rate of climb: 60,000 ft/min (300 m/s)

Time to altitude:
brake release to 20,000 ft (6,100 m) - 1 min 27 s
brake release to 40,000 ft (12,000 m) - 2 min 3 s
brake release to 60,000 ft (18,000 m) - 3 min 6 s
brake release to 70,000 ft (21,000 m) - 3 min 51 s

Level acceleration at 80,000 ft (24,000 m) from top of climb at Mach 1.4 to Mach 2 - 1 min 6 s

Radius of turn (at Mach 1·6 at 60,000 ft (18,000 m)) - 24,000 ft (7,300 m)
Rocket full power endurance - 7 minutes

Impressive ...

[MAINJAFAD]

Coff, The SR 177 would have most likely been up there with the Lightning in the ultimate 'Hooligan' machine stakes, though would have suffered from the exact same limitations of weapon system and armament (AI-23 AIRPASS and 2x Red Top). Though it most likely would have been a bit better in endurance than the Lightning. HTP rocket oxidiser would have most likely made life on the flight line more than a tad more hazardous and may have caused issues with deploying away from base. The Vulcan/Victor 'Blue Steel' boys may be able to answer the 'deployment' one as they were the only people in the RAF to operate a bit of kit that used the stuff operationally.