Defence: Public ignorance, the media, and cutbacks
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Mach Two
Most of the lessons from virtually every other op have been. That's why we stopped calling them "Lessons Learnt" and started calling them "Lessons Identified" instead. Oh, unless the lessons involved cutting something, in which case they were learnt very quickly.
BHR
Perhaps you'd like to elaborate?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BHR
It enables people to form an opinion in respect of what credence can be given to your posts.
I, for example, only served for 11363 days as a Pilot in the RAF.
It enables people to form an opinion in respect of what credence can be given to your posts.
I, for example, only served for 11363 days as a Pilot in the RAF.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Exiled in England
Age: 48
Posts: 1,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11363 days wasted then.....
Any spent being useful???
I'm fishing for pilots tonite, tomorrow would be navs but they are bugger all use in the 21st centruy.
I suggest they cut all the niff naff tail wagging exercises but that would never never happen would it? that would need leaders not managers and budget holders.
Any spent being useful???
I'm fishing for pilots tonite, tomorrow would be navs but they are bugger all use in the 21st centruy.
I suggest they cut all the niff naff tail wagging exercises but that would never never happen would it? that would need leaders not managers and budget holders.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK and where I'm sent!
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cornish,
I'm not certain what you're hoping to acheive there, but I'm sure it adds to the discussion. Ooh, I see, humour!!
So, Bill Hicks, as WEBF asked, let's hear the Trident debate that you've raised.
M2
I'm not certain what you're hoping to acheive there, but I'm sure it adds to the discussion. Ooh, I see, humour!!
So, Bill Hicks, as WEBF asked, let's hear the Trident debate that you've raised.
M2
So, for example, are you are saying that having an instrument rating (as per your pilots flying log book) gives your opinion on UK defence policy more credence than someone who doesn't, for example an Army General or Navy Admiral....
Obviously 5 log books full of instrument ratings, to say nothing of "special flying qualifications" also makes your opinion more valid than someone who only has 1 or 2 such log books....
What planet are you living on exactly......
Your opinion should be given as much or as little credence as anyone else's to start with, its ultimate value being assessed on the strength of the argument you make, supporting evidence providing, logic employed, etc - not on how many log books you have, flying hours, VIPs flown, days in harness, etc....
Obviously 5 log books full of instrument ratings, to say nothing of "special flying qualifications" also makes your opinion more valid than someone who only has 1 or 2 such log books....
What planet are you living on exactly......
Your opinion should be given as much or as little credence as anyone else's to start with, its ultimate value being assessed on the strength of the argument you make, supporting evidence providing, logic employed, etc - not on how many log books you have, flying hours, VIPs flown, days in harness, etc....
caz,
That is not all you are "at a loss to" understand.....
In post 571 of this thread you point out that BHR is a sales executive living in Scotland. In post 574 you state that this means that his opinions should be given no credence, whereas you, with 11,000 odd days in the RAF, and 5 log books, should be listened to!!
I merely tried to point out how narrow minded your attitude is, and that everyones opinion deserved to be heard, at least until proven to the contrary!
For what it is worth, and I'm sure BHR can defend himself, consider the following:
There is no age on BHRs profile.
In one of his postings (which you have no doubt made no effort to check) he refers to previous service in the RN.
So, we have an ex-RN retiree of unknown age, length of service, retiring rank, experience, etc, making comments about SSBNs, vs an ex-RAF VIP pilot with 11,000 days and 5 log books, who is saying that the first persons comments have no credence. Why not? Why are you more of an expert on SSBNs and british nuclear defence policy than him?
Even if BHR were not ex-military, all that would mean is that he would lack personal experience to help form his opinion. He could be well read on the subject, have an exceptionally keen mind, an unusual approach that is worth considering, etc. Your attitude strikes me as narrow minded in the extreme.
In my day flying multi crew aircraft we always tried to ensure that the most junior member of the crew was confident enough to come up with an opinion/query/idea without feeling intimidated, or that his point of view wouldn't be listened to by the rest of the crew - this was to the benefit of all.
Were you the sort of captain that thought because of his experience/ability that he always knew best, and told the co-pilot that when you wanted his opinion you would give it to him? Thankfully such dinosaurs are largely a thing of the past.
As to why I inhabit this forum, that is really none of your business - but I am a still serving member of the RAF, and fulfill the criteria for lurking here... Nor do I feel the need to tell people how many days I have served, log books I have, hours I have flown, etc to help justify any of my comments!
That is not all you are "at a loss to" understand.....
In post 571 of this thread you point out that BHR is a sales executive living in Scotland. In post 574 you state that this means that his opinions should be given no credence, whereas you, with 11,000 odd days in the RAF, and 5 log books, should be listened to!!
I merely tried to point out how narrow minded your attitude is, and that everyones opinion deserved to be heard, at least until proven to the contrary!
For what it is worth, and I'm sure BHR can defend himself, consider the following:
There is no age on BHRs profile.
In one of his postings (which you have no doubt made no effort to check) he refers to previous service in the RN.
So, we have an ex-RN retiree of unknown age, length of service, retiring rank, experience, etc, making comments about SSBNs, vs an ex-RAF VIP pilot with 11,000 days and 5 log books, who is saying that the first persons comments have no credence. Why not? Why are you more of an expert on SSBNs and british nuclear defence policy than him?
Even if BHR were not ex-military, all that would mean is that he would lack personal experience to help form his opinion. He could be well read on the subject, have an exceptionally keen mind, an unusual approach that is worth considering, etc. Your attitude strikes me as narrow minded in the extreme.
In my day flying multi crew aircraft we always tried to ensure that the most junior member of the crew was confident enough to come up with an opinion/query/idea without feeling intimidated, or that his point of view wouldn't be listened to by the rest of the crew - this was to the benefit of all.
Were you the sort of captain that thought because of his experience/ability that he always knew best, and told the co-pilot that when you wanted his opinion you would give it to him? Thankfully such dinosaurs are largely a thing of the past.
As to why I inhabit this forum, that is really none of your business - but I am a still serving member of the RAF, and fulfill the criteria for lurking here... Nor do I feel the need to tell people how many days I have served, log books I have, hours I have flown, etc to help justify any of my comments!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South of England
Age: 74
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Come on K f; we're not all pilots.
"A 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."
Rgds SOS
"A 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."
Rgds SOS
Thread Starter
UK military steps up plans for Iran attack amid fresh nuclear fears
Good job that SDSR was not based on a assumption of having no crises this deacde. Oh....
Good job that SDSR was not based on a assumption of having no crises this deacde. Oh....
caz,
What, no cutting comment, rebuttal, witty retort, put down...?
...or perhaps even an admission that some of your comments were, at best, misjudged?
(Edited a couple of days later to add) ....I take it thats a no then!
What, no cutting comment, rebuttal, witty retort, put down...?
...or perhaps even an admission that some of your comments were, at best, misjudged?
(Edited a couple of days later to add) ....I take it thats a no then!
Last edited by Biggus; 7th Dec 2011 at 09:09.
