411A,
You seem to make a habit of popping-up to criticize the RAF TriStar operation and boasting about how your outfit could do things so much better. Here are a few facts that you might not have considered:
1. Many of the ongoing problems with the RAF TriStars are airworthiness management issues. The RAF TriStars are military aircraft and are fitted with equipment that would preclude them from obtaining a Certificate of Airworthiness. They have to be managed and maintained under the military airworthiness system. This regulatory framework is not necessarily optimized for airliner-type aircraft and consequently some of the engineering practices may be a little more restrictive than found in commercial operations. This limitation is not exclusive to the the UK and could just as easily be found when comparing an airline DC-10 operation to that of the KC-10 by the USAF. Moreover, the Design Authority for the RAF TriStar rests with Marshall of Cambridge and not with Lockheed. Experience of the L-1011 operating under (insert name of country) civilian regulations does not necessarily mean that you understand the operation of the TriStar K1, KC1 or C2 as a UK military aircraft.
2. As a direct consequence of HM Government policy, RAF TriStars are primarily engaged on a task that cannot be performed by civilian charter. Regardless of whether it is a tiny company like yours or the might of British Airways - they are not equipped to perform the task. Delays and inconvinience to the individual service personnel as a result of this policy are regrettable, but the policy would only be changed if the operational commander reported that the airbridge is failing to meet his need. Other nations do things differently, but that is for them to decide how they want to balance risk, use of assets and cost.
3. The UK spends millions of pounds every year on chartering air transport. To re-iterate these operations do not perform the same task as the TriStar - they cannot. However, the MoD does understand what it wants and what it is willing to pay. Usually, this is the lowest bid from a reputable operator. Interestingly, the DC-10 still appears to going strong in this market but the L-1011 has died out. Maybe there are none left with operators that the MoD regards as acceptable?
4. Please don't think that any association with UN military work is going to gain your company any crediblity.
One last point:
L1011 lower deck stowage...unsurpassed
Except by A300, A330, A340, B747......