Military AircrewA forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here.
RN cancels flypast of Ark Royal by NSW - "all Will's fault"
The RN cancelled a flypast of the Ark as she returned to Pompey: "Prince William’s use of military aircraft to visit the home of his girlfriend Kate Middleton has led Navy bosses to abandon a jet fly-past to celebrate the return of the Ark Royal."
Interesting precedent, although I do wonder just how much our allegedly cash-strapped forces waste on flybys, practice flybys, airborne spares for flybys, squadron reformation flybys, squadron disbandment flybys, pass- out flybys, funeral flybys, re-pat flybys, all-sorts-of-memorial flybys, BBC presenter flybys, annual reception flybys etc etc.
I'm not saying that a handful aren't well worth it - for example a re-pat flypast for relatives, but we do seem to operate to a 'if in doubt, do a flyby' mentality, then next minute claim we haven't got a pot to piss in.
Same as the RAF having just banned downhill ski-ing as acceptable AT because of the perception of the public being one of apres-ski and ski holidays. Suppose we should ban rugby then (people like a beer afterwards, tut), cricket (who is paying for those sandwiches, tut), diving (always sunny places isn't it? Tut).
Makes me want to throw up, but I am sure that would look bad to the public as well, so I best not.
How is Wills showing off his Grannie's Chinook to his girlfriend in the field behind his prospective in-laws' house remotely like a flypast of the flagship as she returns from deployment (albeit not an operational deployment)?
OK so it's 150 miles from Cottesmore, but I find it hard to imagine that they could not produce a plan that showed how all/most phases of the trip were productive in a training/skills sense.
I doubt it was the Dep Harrier Force Commander's idea to nix the trip. AO is a bon oeuf.
Chinooks land in fields all the time as essential training - so they landed in a particularly nice field once in a while - maybe we should be grateful that we relieved the load from those landowners that still permit such things.
Same with the Ark coming home - bit of transit flying, bit of littoral famil, bit of formation flying, sorted.
Why doesn't someone in MoD just have the balls to tell the press to shove it, or maybe even pre-empt any negative press by inviting them along and explain the benefit all at the same time???
Its a carrier, its designed to have aircraft on or near it all the time. The fact is we have too few Harriers, too few pilots doing too many jobs in places we should not be in. Hopefully the typhoon will usable soon and the NSW can get back to doing what its meant to do.
Off topic, the Americans are looking very seriously at a CVF variant for the USMC.
So what about the huge costs involved getting all those aircraft lined up nice and straight(ish) for the 90th flypast over the queen? No-one seemed to mind then. If this harrier wasn't going to be flown by the brother of the ships captain would there have been a story or an issue then?
What a shame the PC tree hugging world we live in has now reached our not so illustrious leadership.
Must have been a slow news day at the torygraph though.
I have to blame the RAF hierarchy as part of a plot to destroy the FAA and cancel the carriers.....
Utter madness......again and again and again and again. Incorporate it as part of a training trip, ensure the press are 'on message' through use of effective PR and crack on!
Same as the RAF having just banned downhill ski-ing as acceptable AT because of the perception of the public being one of apres-ski and ski holidays. Suppose we should ban rugby then (people like a beer afterwards, tut), cricket (who is paying for those sandwiches, tut), diving (always sunny places isn't it? Tut).
Unusual though it is for this forum, perhaps we can inject a bit of accuracy here.
1. The RAF has not banned downhill skiing - it was a Tri-Service decision (the Army have the lead on land-based AT activities).
2. I understand that the decision was taken as the Downhill skiing per-se does not completely meet the objectives of Adventurous Training. Just the same way that cricket and rugby do not and diving does.
3. Downhill skiing can still be undertaken as AT; however, it cannot be the sole activity. To qualify as AT it must be included with another qualifying activity such as ski-touring.
4. Downhill skiing as a sole activity can still be undertaken 'on-duty' with public funding as sport as opposed to AT - just the same way that rugby and cricket do. Indeed, in this respect, skiing has an advantage over most other recognised and approved sports because travel to Europe for inter and intra Service championships is funded at public expense.
And, before anyone accuses me, I am neither a PEdO nor a PTI.
Last edited by Climebear : 15th August 2008 at 09:24.
"Off topic, the Americans are looking very seriously at a CVF variant for the USMC."
Really? They must be off their heads. The likelihood that the CVF design could be reconfigured internally to reflect the required troop spaces, vehicle decks, logistics handling / offload etc is pretty remote to say the least.
As with most attempts to re-jig an existing design, they'd be better off with a clean sheet of paper.
The good news (for the RAF) is according to today's 'Metro' PW flew an "RN helicopter to a stag do" and also landed an "RN helicopter in his girlfriend's back garden". Is this another RN take-over bid?
And a Royal Navy Spokesman confirmed that in the light of a number of recent PR blunders Ark had been signalled suggesting that the flypast might be inappropriate if it involved public funds.
Similar Threads 
Is this another RN take-over bid? 
Linear Mode
