pompous self-belief etc
Crab, I have long respected many of your views, although you do make a habit of including variances that reduce that overall support! I'm afraid your comment above puts you straight into the
League of Arrogant Idiots, frequently afflicting others of your hue. It's a shame when you besmirch the noble deeds and can-do heroism of those in a 1940s service, with the pompous self-belief of some typical Crabs from 40-50 years later.
Those who go down to the sea in ships, particularly those who fly from such platforms, are there as both a main attack system and/or a significant part of the defence shield. That they operate afloat also live by the rules of the sea, foremost, whilst using the tools of the air to make every attempt to save their fellow seafarers, should the need arise. Not being SAR "specialists", as
you so pompously imply, should result in more recognition when they really put their lives on the line, rather than attract your criticism - most often, they don't have the luxury of a slow reaction time or risk assessment, as there's no-one mid ocean but them.
There are many more examples of airborne life saving than tragedy, but occasionally it doesn't work out, despite best efforts being made in the traditions of a service that has a significantly longer heritage than some others.
Greater balance, and a little humility, would go a long way to securing appropriate recognition of an airframe, of whatever colour, in whatever place, that was part of my formative aviating career both in peace & war. A more forgiving and dependable machine, despite numerous foibles, would have been difficult to find and those who flew them will remain forever in their debt, I'd suggest?
