I agree that the situation encountered by 56(R) Sqn, vs AT, on their return from deployment, as described in the RAF News, was 'less than ideal'. However, I am afraid to many of us in the UK armed services it was nothing more than a reality check for 56(R) on the current state of the AT fleet. Many people, from all 3 services, currently face far more disruption, and worse travel arrangements, when returning from Iraq, and no doubt shortly Afghanistan (which are far less hospitable than Cyprus is during a morale building 'jolly', sorry 'Exercise').
The AT fleet has an appalling reputation amongst the Army, often deserevedly so!! I have met people from Iraq trying to get away on their R&R break who have spent all of it on RAF AT!! Now before all the AT guys start jumping up and down, I am not saying it is their fault. ALL the people in the AT world, at least that I have met, crews, movers (yes even movers...!!) are doing their best, but at the end of the day they are being asked/tasked to do too much with too little equipment - which is getting very old, and breaks down with alarming frequency!!! I gather questions were even asked in parliament as to whether the AT fleet could cope with the Afghanistan jaunt on top of everything else - answer equals no, as no doubt any spotters at the end of the runway at Brize can confirm!!
Oh yes, I also doubt 56(R) will get much sympathy for their Fairford to Leuchars coach trip from the boys at Kinloss. My understanding is that Nimrod guys (aircrew and groundcrew) have been bused from Kinloss to Brize (Fairford) and back at least twice (2 round trips, i.e 4 journeys) a year, on their way to and from the sandpit, for several years now!! Not that it receieves much publicity! So much for it being an Air Force!!