Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

BBC Dambuster flypast article

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

BBC Dambuster flypast article

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 16th May 2008, 06:17
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Howe O' the Mearns
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Exclamation BBC Dambuster flypast article

Imagine my surprise (or lack of it ) upon reading this, especially the sentence
A Spitfire, a Hurricane, two Tornadoes and a Dakota transport plane - all from the present 617 Squadron - will join the fly-past.
Now not only is THAT what I call overstretch but does it also not set a new benchmark for multi-role squadrons? Some gonk in Whitehall must be exceedingly pleased with himself

Please excuse the apparent flippant tone regarding overstretch, it must be no laughing matter for those who have to endure it first hand.
B_Fawlty is offline  
Old 16th May 2008, 09:52
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Warrington
Age: 55
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You do have to wonder about "Defence Correspondents" in the BBC. A while back I was amused at an article about the F 35 Lightning 2 which had a picture, you guessed it, of the EE version with the caption "F 35 - the RAFs warplane of the future"! Likewise, before GW2, BBC placed 7 Armd Bde as being based in Bergen, Norway, as opposed to Bergen, Lower Saxony- armour in the mountains, yes that makes sense...
bazzacat is offline  
Old 16th May 2008, 10:17
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany
Age: 74
Posts: 883
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It seems that our esteemed journalist must visit PPRUNE. The article has been corrected.
S'land is offline  
Old 16th May 2008, 14:49
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Norfolk U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bit of thread drift maybe, but when I visited Coningsby some years back I was told that the Lancaster is the only heavy bomber on the RAF fleet!
The Flying Pram is offline  
Old 16th May 2008, 15:07
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Darling - where are we?
Posts: 2,580
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
Bit of thread drift maybe, but when I visited Coningsby some years back I was told that the Lancaster is the only heavy bomber on the RAF fleet!
Yes - I heard that too. Apparently BBMF's Lancaster still has to be declared as a long-range heavy bomber under the Conventional Forces Europe Treaty.
Melchett01 is offline  
Old 16th May 2008, 15:13
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Flight Ops Dept
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote:
Bit of thread drift maybe, but when I visited Coningsby some years back I was told that the Lancaster is the only heavy bomber on the RAF fleet!
Yes - I heard that too. Apparently BBMF's Lancaster still has to be declared as a long-range heavy bomber under the Conventional Forces Europe Treaty
a few years back under CFE treaty or something similar at EGXE we had some east europeans visit and were being pedantic as they found an old, obviously wrecked saxon personel carrirer (on gaurding duties with the rocks if i remember rightly) and they wanted to see where it was declared
blue monday is offline  
Old 16th May 2008, 16:18
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Yorkshire
Age: 80
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Does that mean VICTORY should be declared as a (line of) battleship in commission?
exscribbler is offline  
Old 16th May 2008, 17:30
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Road to Nowhere
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Does that mean VICTORY should be declared as a (line of) battleship in commission?
Don't have my Treaty with me at home, but ISTR:

Ships aren't decared under CFE.

There is also no requirement for museum pieces and gate guardians to count towards the maxima allowed in each area (not that either group of states parties comes close these days), but there is a tendancy in the UK for us to leave them in annual data exchanges, so I am not surprised that inspectors want to see them.

STH
SirToppamHat is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.