Blairforce 1 Ready for take-off
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blairforce 1 Ready for take-off
'Blair Force One' ready for take-off
BRIAN BRADY
WESTMINSTER EDITOR
TONY Blair is set to order a luxuriously equipped jumbo jet dedicated to flying him around the world to visit international leaders.
The Prime Minister's renewed plan for a US-style 'Blair Force One' is part of a radical shake-up of travel arrangements for senior ministers and Royals.
Blair's jet - expected to be a wide-bodied Boeing 777 - would form part of a fleet of up to four state-funded aircraft under a review headed by the Prime Minister's 'efficiency guru', Sir Peter Gershon.
Downing Street sources have confirmed that Buckingham Palace is "enthusiastically" backing the plan to replace the ageing 'Queen's Flight' with a squadron of aircraft to ferry both members of the government and Royals.
The fleet would comprise a large passenger jet, a smaller jet capable of travelling long distances and two short-haul aircraft.
But news of the proposal has provoked fury from Labour's opponents and threatened to reignite condemnation of the huge bill for transporting Blair and his ministers around the world.
"If we ever wanted a true legacy with which to remember this Prime Minister then the whole Blair Force One folly remains the most appropriate testament to his vanity," said a Conservative spokesman.
"Everyone knows how much his ministers are already costing us with their extravagant travel arrangements, so it is incredible that he really thinks he can get this ludicrous project through."
Government advisers have consistently proposed a streamlined system of ministerial travel to replace the haphazard current arrangements, which require ministers to charter aircraft from the Royal Air Force or private firms to ferry them around the world.
Former defence secretary Geoff Hoon revealed two years ago that the proposal to purchase a plane and kit it out for the use of Blair and his staff had been discussed "at the highest levels of government".
The plan won the support of MPs on the intelligence and security committee, who claimed that establishing a single plane for the Prime Minister's use would be more secure than relying on whichever aircraft was available just before a trip.
But it was quietly dropped amid concerns about public reaction to the estimated £80m bill.
There were also suggestions that the Treasury had objected to the cost.
Downing Street now hopes the Blair Force One proposal can be made more palatable by linking it to a modernisation of provision for the Queen and her family.
Gershon, the businessman behind the government efficiency review that sounded the death knell for 80,000 civil service jobs, has been given the task of investigating an idea that could add hundreds of millions of pounds to the Treasury budget.
A Cabinet Office spokesman said Gershon would review "the current arrangements for the provision of air travel for the Royal Family, government ministers and accompanying senior officials, taking into account safety, reliability, security and value for money, and make recommendations for improvement". He is expected to present his report in the next few weeks.
"The Royal Family is very keen to press ahead with this, far more so than we are, but I think that it will happen," a senior minister said last week.
But the plan still faces some resistance within Blair's own Cabinet. A number of ministers fear using a dedicated aircraft could be a drain on their departmental budgets.
While Blair's trips are largely self-financing - through charges levied on the journalists accompanying his party to destinations including Washington and Moscow - other ministers would have trouble filling the plane for their less important missions abroad.
A seat on the Prime Minister's plane for the visits to Moscow, Berlin, Luxembourg and Paris last week cost £800.
One Cabinet minister confessed that the travel shake-up may be rushed through as it could prove too radical if delayed.
He said: "We'd prefer not to be ordering a fleet of aircraft just before an election."
Blair and his ministers have run up bills for tens of thousands of pounds for journeys on RAF jets from 32 (The Royal) Squadron, formerly known as The Queen's Flight. Ministers' use of the seven planes in the squadron rose to 140 flights last year, at a cost to the taxpayer of up to £1,600 an hour.
Last year, the foreign secretary, Jack Straw, and the agriculture secretary, Margaret Beckett, were the most regular ministerial customers for the squadron, which is based at RAF Northolt.
They ran up a bill of some £30,000 for at least 10 flights with the squadron.
Colleagues, including Blair himself, have spent similar sums on chartering private planes for trips abroad.
The Prime Minister normally uses a chartered British Airways Boeing 777 for long-haul journeys.
The existing fleet of 32 Squadron includes two 20-year-old BAe 146s, which can carry up to 23 people, and five much smaller Hawker S125s which the Royal Family share with ministers.
scotsman.co.uk
BRIAN BRADY
WESTMINSTER EDITOR
TONY Blair is set to order a luxuriously equipped jumbo jet dedicated to flying him around the world to visit international leaders.
The Prime Minister's renewed plan for a US-style 'Blair Force One' is part of a radical shake-up of travel arrangements for senior ministers and Royals.
Blair's jet - expected to be a wide-bodied Boeing 777 - would form part of a fleet of up to four state-funded aircraft under a review headed by the Prime Minister's 'efficiency guru', Sir Peter Gershon.
Downing Street sources have confirmed that Buckingham Palace is "enthusiastically" backing the plan to replace the ageing 'Queen's Flight' with a squadron of aircraft to ferry both members of the government and Royals.
The fleet would comprise a large passenger jet, a smaller jet capable of travelling long distances and two short-haul aircraft.
But news of the proposal has provoked fury from Labour's opponents and threatened to reignite condemnation of the huge bill for transporting Blair and his ministers around the world.
"If we ever wanted a true legacy with which to remember this Prime Minister then the whole Blair Force One folly remains the most appropriate testament to his vanity," said a Conservative spokesman.
"Everyone knows how much his ministers are already costing us with their extravagant travel arrangements, so it is incredible that he really thinks he can get this ludicrous project through."
Government advisers have consistently proposed a streamlined system of ministerial travel to replace the haphazard current arrangements, which require ministers to charter aircraft from the Royal Air Force or private firms to ferry them around the world.
Former defence secretary Geoff Hoon revealed two years ago that the proposal to purchase a plane and kit it out for the use of Blair and his staff had been discussed "at the highest levels of government".
The plan won the support of MPs on the intelligence and security committee, who claimed that establishing a single plane for the Prime Minister's use would be more secure than relying on whichever aircraft was available just before a trip.
But it was quietly dropped amid concerns about public reaction to the estimated £80m bill.
There were also suggestions that the Treasury had objected to the cost.
Downing Street now hopes the Blair Force One proposal can be made more palatable by linking it to a modernisation of provision for the Queen and her family.
Gershon, the businessman behind the government efficiency review that sounded the death knell for 80,000 civil service jobs, has been given the task of investigating an idea that could add hundreds of millions of pounds to the Treasury budget.
A Cabinet Office spokesman said Gershon would review "the current arrangements for the provision of air travel for the Royal Family, government ministers and accompanying senior officials, taking into account safety, reliability, security and value for money, and make recommendations for improvement". He is expected to present his report in the next few weeks.
"The Royal Family is very keen to press ahead with this, far more so than we are, but I think that it will happen," a senior minister said last week.
But the plan still faces some resistance within Blair's own Cabinet. A number of ministers fear using a dedicated aircraft could be a drain on their departmental budgets.
While Blair's trips are largely self-financing - through charges levied on the journalists accompanying his party to destinations including Washington and Moscow - other ministers would have trouble filling the plane for their less important missions abroad.
A seat on the Prime Minister's plane for the visits to Moscow, Berlin, Luxembourg and Paris last week cost £800.
One Cabinet minister confessed that the travel shake-up may be rushed through as it could prove too radical if delayed.
He said: "We'd prefer not to be ordering a fleet of aircraft just before an election."
Blair and his ministers have run up bills for tens of thousands of pounds for journeys on RAF jets from 32 (The Royal) Squadron, formerly known as The Queen's Flight. Ministers' use of the seven planes in the squadron rose to 140 flights last year, at a cost to the taxpayer of up to £1,600 an hour.
Last year, the foreign secretary, Jack Straw, and the agriculture secretary, Margaret Beckett, were the most regular ministerial customers for the squadron, which is based at RAF Northolt.
They ran up a bill of some £30,000 for at least 10 flights with the squadron.
Colleagues, including Blair himself, have spent similar sums on chartering private planes for trips abroad.
The Prime Minister normally uses a chartered British Airways Boeing 777 for long-haul journeys.
The existing fleet of 32 Squadron includes two 20-year-old BAe 146s, which can carry up to 23 people, and five much smaller Hawker S125s which the Royal Family share with ministers.
scotsman.co.uk
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course he should have a proper aircraft, just like there should be a Royal Yacht. It is frankly appalling that one of the worlds largest economies can't support these basic trappings of power that are necessary in many parts of the world just to get respect from the Locals. For example anywhere in Africa/Persian Gulf/ South America. They all have private Boeings for their tin pot rulers, and without one we just look cheap. The days when our lot turned up off the coast in a floating palace were a lot easier on trade deals.
Suspicion breeds confidence
I thought the plan was to use one of the new A330 tankers for the job. Whats wrong with the VC10? If its safe enough for the crew to fly then its safe enough for him.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought the plan was to use one of the new A330 tankers for the job. Whats wrong with the VC10? If its safe enough for the crew to fly then its safe enough for him.
When it took off, there was a huge plume of smoke as is usual and it was the loudest jet to take off from Heathrow that day apart from the Concorde.....
Style
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blair currently uses a BA B777 on long haul trips. Apparently fitted out for his use when needed.
It was circulated last year or so that he would be using the same BA -777 but it would have a comms fit and all things 'AF1-ish' put in when needed.
It was circulated last year or so that he would be using the same BA -777 but it would have a comms fit and all things 'AF1-ish' put in when needed.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've know the PM use a BA 767 as well but it certainly wasn't especially kitted out for him.
This debate always stalls on the cost. It has been shown time and time again that for essential travel either schedule or charter is more cost effective than ownership (although some sort of assured contract or PFI might bring the cost down). I had the honour (sic) of going on a No 10 chartered aircraft - in fact we were told we had to use it. The cost charged per seat to our budget was more than the BA flex business fare! Still getting in and out of the destination airfield was much slicker than travelling commercial.
This debate always stalls on the cost. It has been shown time and time again that for essential travel either schedule or charter is more cost effective than ownership (although some sort of assured contract or PFI might bring the cost down). I had the honour (sic) of going on a No 10 chartered aircraft - in fact we were told we had to use it. The cost charged per seat to our budget was more than the BA flex business fare! Still getting in and out of the destination airfield was much slicker than travelling commercial.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally don't see a problem with providing a decent military ac for our Head of Government. Other countries manage it, but since we have such a massively depleted defence budget I can see why it hasn't happened. I've seen (US)AF1, CFC1, FAF1, RSF1, etc, transiting through our airspace carrying national leaders, whereas we seldom fly KRFxx with Blair on board to other countries. It's almost as if the RAF is deemed incapable of transporting our own PM, and I'd imagine that's how it appears to other contries when Blair steps off a BA ac at some military airfield wherever he happens to be visiting.
It's not right that Blair has to "borrow" ac from 32 Sqn or BA. I think the logical choice would be to augment 32 Sqn with a larger ac (B777 sounds fine) for long-haul trips by ministers and senior Royals, and assign it an RFR1 callsign. It strikes a better impression, it's more secure, and it's flown by a 100% dedicated organisation instead of a company which assigns priorities as it sees fit. I can, however, see Blair's vanity getting in the way. If he had the option, he'd probably try to form an RAF sqn specifically for diplos and politicos, leaving the unfashionable Royal Family, busy as they are, to cope with a few helos and some old BAe146s. Otherwise he'd contract ministerial travel to some bland civvy company, another slap in the face for the military.
This clearly needs more thought. And Blair should stop interfering and allow people who know what they're doing to take care of it. Why not give the MoD and FCO control of the issue, and order the Treasury to fund whatever proposals come out the other end?
Silly me - extra money for defence?
It's not right that Blair has to "borrow" ac from 32 Sqn or BA. I think the logical choice would be to augment 32 Sqn with a larger ac (B777 sounds fine) for long-haul trips by ministers and senior Royals, and assign it an RFR1 callsign. It strikes a better impression, it's more secure, and it's flown by a 100% dedicated organisation instead of a company which assigns priorities as it sees fit. I can, however, see Blair's vanity getting in the way. If he had the option, he'd probably try to form an RAF sqn specifically for diplos and politicos, leaving the unfashionable Royal Family, busy as they are, to cope with a few helos and some old BAe146s. Otherwise he'd contract ministerial travel to some bland civvy company, another slap in the face for the military.
This clearly needs more thought. And Blair should stop interfering and allow people who know what they're doing to take care of it. Why not give the MoD and FCO control of the issue, and order the Treasury to fund whatever proposals come out the other end?
Silly me - extra money for defence?
Isn't this simply an admission from Downing Street that the RAF inventory is too old and too unreliable to be a feasible option?
Perhaps not having to travel in the aircraft those military blokes have to put up with will remove the embarrassment of having to be reminded first hand how things now are, along with not having to be flown by inexperienced pilots suffering at the end of an appallingly cut training system. If Blair Force One does come into existence, I'll wager real money that he tries to have it operated by a non-military organisation.
Me, I'd like to see £80m spent on ONE VC-10. A British aircraft, and the fastest airliner in the world
Perhaps not having to travel in the aircraft those military blokes have to put up with will remove the embarrassment of having to be reminded first hand how things now are, along with not having to be flown by inexperienced pilots suffering at the end of an appallingly cut training system. If Blair Force One does come into existence, I'll wager real money that he tries to have it operated by a non-military organisation.
Me, I'd like to see £80m spent on ONE VC-10. A British aircraft, and the fastest airliner in the world
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be fair, we're not Blair's troops...
I totally agree with the idea that he should be flown in a British ac. Same as USAF1 is made by Boeing, FAF1 is made by Airbus.... so Blair gets to choose between the VC10 or (gulp) the Comet....
Actually, the Comet wouldn't be such a bad idea. Nimrod, as we know, has excellent comms capabilities, and if you remove all the MARINT equipment you have a robust airframe with enough space for a PM and his entourage.
So..... civvy company funded by PFI sounds like the way ahead?
I totally agree with the idea that he should be flown in a British ac. Same as USAF1 is made by Boeing, FAF1 is made by Airbus.... so Blair gets to choose between the VC10 or (gulp) the Comet....
Actually, the Comet wouldn't be such a bad idea. Nimrod, as we know, has excellent comms capabilities, and if you remove all the MARINT equipment you have a robust airframe with enough space for a PM and his entourage.
So..... civvy company funded by PFI sounds like the way ahead?
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VIP Jets
In Australia, our 'VIP Flight' (34SQN) has 2 x B737-BBJ and 3 x Challenger 604s, all operated on a lease basis through (I believe) Qantas.
The BBJs are kitted out with all the necessary comms etc, and can cover just about anywhere on the globe with one stop.
The 604s look after most of the government's and military leadership's domestic travel.
All-in-all, a good and economical arrangement.
Magoo
The BBJs are kitted out with all the necessary comms etc, and can cover just about anywhere on the globe with one stop.
The 604s look after most of the government's and military leadership's domestic travel.
All-in-all, a good and economical arrangement.
Magoo
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK, sometimes!
Age: 74
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on guys, open your eyes 
It's obvious really. He needs his own jet because the amount of defense cuts he is making there will soon be no RAF left, the RN will be a couple of pedellos in Hyde Park and the Army will be the dozen or so guards at the royal palaces
MadMark!!!
It's obvious really. He needs his own jet because the amount of defense cuts he is making there will soon be no RAF left, the RN will be a couple of pedellos in Hyde Park and the Army will be the dozen or so guards at the royal palaces
MadMark!!!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
will it be available for the friday run out of Belfast city airport for all the ministers and civil servants who couldn't possible stay in Northern ireland? or will they be forced to use easy jet like the rest of us?
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: at the end of the bar
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget the person who stopped using RAF VC10s as the PM transport was John Major, afetr he was embarassed at his old clunky, rear facing seated '10 being parked next to Clinton's nice shiny new VC25 at a summit or 'summat.
It's only in the UK that we could get into a political tizz about providing proper, military support to the head of State and the Head of Government. Can you imagine POTUS flying in a rented AA 777?
Have a couple of the A330s (or A340s) kitted out in VIP fit, and get some A319/ACJs for the short haul. Dunno what would replace the 125s 'cos The Uk don't build bizjets anymore.
Falcons anyone
It's only in the UK that we could get into a political tizz about providing proper, military support to the head of State and the Head of Government. Can you imagine POTUS flying in a rented AA 777?
Have a couple of the A330s (or A340s) kitted out in VIP fit, and get some A319/ACJs for the short haul. Dunno what would replace the 125s 'cos The Uk don't build bizjets anymore.
Falcons anyone
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
XV277
a Bombardier Global Express would do the job for the 125s I think, especially since RAF is getting some anyway for ASTOR and Shorts Belfast does the mods. Some 319s to replace the 146 fleet and you're all set and in the CJ config could do some supply tasking as well.
Linking BF1 to the tanker order is important as it may be the necessary spur to get the process moving - remember the Aussies started their process after RAF and are receiving airframes sooner!
a Bombardier Global Express would do the job for the 125s I think, especially since RAF is getting some anyway for ASTOR and Shorts Belfast does the mods. Some 319s to replace the 146 fleet and you're all set and in the CJ config could do some supply tasking as well.
Linking BF1 to the tanker order is important as it may be the necessary spur to get the process moving - remember the Aussies started their process after RAF and are receiving airframes sooner!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: at the end of the bar
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Linking BF1 to the tanker order is important as it may be the necessary spur to get the process moving - remember the Aussies started their process after RAF and are receiving airframes sooner!
Still think we'll end up buying them outright, like the C-17s