Time to bin the Red Arrows
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kilmarnock,United Kingdom
Age: 68
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
anotherthing
With all due respect, PFI equates to buying through the equivalent of mortgage finance. Longer term it's unlikely to save the Government money. If anything it will cost more, especially after the loading for a profit margin to a Contractor and their bankers is factored in.
Thanks to PFI we have a wad of schools and other building projects entered into on pre crash terms, the future costs of which will now be a millstone round the neck of Councils and other Public bodies for decades. Post crash and with the slump in certain business sectors, these contracts and the income stream they generate are big factors in determining the market value and even viability of the Company's that own them. Is that what defence spending is for?
PFI allowed Government to spend without this being reflected on the PSBR as would have direct spending. Post crash and with the banking bale out, it's a busted flush. We would be ill advised to carry on as before in thinking PFI is any alternative to a properly funded and well managed defence budget. The latter remains the real issue to be confronted by this Country which seems to spend a lot on Defence but gets too little to show for this.
With all due respect, PFI equates to buying through the equivalent of mortgage finance. Longer term it's unlikely to save the Government money. If anything it will cost more, especially after the loading for a profit margin to a Contractor and their bankers is factored in.
Thanks to PFI we have a wad of schools and other building projects entered into on pre crash terms, the future costs of which will now be a millstone round the neck of Councils and other Public bodies for decades. Post crash and with the slump in certain business sectors, these contracts and the income stream they generate are big factors in determining the market value and even viability of the Company's that own them. Is that what defence spending is for?
PFI allowed Government to spend without this being reflected on the PSBR as would have direct spending. Post crash and with the banking bale out, it's a busted flush. We would be ill advised to carry on as before in thinking PFI is any alternative to a properly funded and well managed defence budget. The latter remains the real issue to be confronted by this Country which seems to spend a lot on Defence but gets too little to show for this.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: somewhere special
Age: 46
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Facts and figures about RIAT.
Royal Air Force Charitable Trust Enterprises
Accounts for 2008-2009
From an income of over 8 Million pounds, the charity got 300 thousand.
Of which, less than 200 thousand pounds was given to the people we all expect to be getting the money. Still, the expenses were right up there in the good figures, so nobody missed out.
If that was a business the bank would pull the plug.
http://www.airtattoo.com/Files/repor...nts%202009.pdf
Royal Air Force Charitable Trust Enterprises
Accounts for 2008-2009
From an income of over 8 Million pounds, the charity got 300 thousand.
Of which, less than 200 thousand pounds was given to the people we all expect to be getting the money. Still, the expenses were right up there in the good figures, so nobody missed out.
If that was a business the bank would pull the plug.
http://www.airtattoo.com/Files/repor...nts%202009.pdf
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was mention above of the possibility of the BNP or a Muslim government getting into power. I can't help but be amused of the thought of these two having to form a coalition government. Sorry it has nothing to do with the reds, but I do find it funny.
While we are on the subject of whether the reds cost the taxpayer a lot of money, or are good value for money, it may be worth remembering that the 'cones hotline' cost us £26.000.000!
While we are on the subject of whether the reds cost the taxpayer a lot of money, or are good value for money, it may be worth remembering that the 'cones hotline' cost us £26.000.000!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beagle,
normally I find myself at least a little in agreement with yourself (mind you I only read selected threads <g>)... but I agree with Airpolice. Several folk on here are arguing that the saving wouldn't affect anything - quite right - it isn't about saving money, it's about making a very public statement (probably the only thing the public MIGHT notice) that the overstretch has now snapped.
No, they do not - the Reds remind the general public that all is well with an RAF that can still do this stuff... and allows everyone to believe that the rest of the RAF is as s**t hot... when that is no longer the case. It tells the room temperature IQ'd general public that everything is actually still just fine, we can spare jets and time for airshows and nice videos. It's papering over the cracks, and while the RAF is determined to present a shiny public face nobody is ever going to see the grunge underneath.
What is the point of the Reds? Present something like a genuine business case, a reasoned argument why we should have them....not all this fake accountancy tosh - they're paid for by BAe...yeah, right...a company we should be distancing ourselves from in my view, bearing the main responsibility IMO for our current lack of an MPA, rather than having them sponsor our aerobatics team. Failing that let's sign up a few drug cartels for the T shirts!
While we had an airforce they were a nice shiny bit of it that we were all proud of - now we're approaching the point where we have a world class aerobatics team but no airforce. We're the RAF, not ****ing Red Bull!
PR? Not needed, we should produce damn good PR about CAS in our current war theatre - did the RAF send out display teams in 1940, or did we rely on the 'real live PR' of contrails overhead? Recruiting - don't make me laugh, we don't need to recruit, we employ whole units simply to weed out the unsuitable! 'Getting the right type of recruit' - bolleux, and anyway it'd be cheaper to run a central London office and dine out candidates with impressive CVs...
Sorry, I think those reacting in horror to the OP (and I, initially, thought it was the bi monthly Reds basher initially, so I'm a convert) are being a tad Colonel Blimpish, in this climate survival should be a solid reason based on military capabilty, not showbiz. This is life, not X factor.
Discuss.
Dave
normally I find myself at least a little in agreement with yourself (mind you I only read selected threads <g>)... but I agree with Airpolice. Several folk on here are arguing that the saving wouldn't affect anything - quite right - it isn't about saving money, it's about making a very public statement (probably the only thing the public MIGHT notice) that the overstretch has now snapped.
Hear hear. The Reds, along with the other RAF airshow performers, do at least remind the general public that we actually have an Air Force.
What is the point of the Reds? Present something like a genuine business case, a reasoned argument why we should have them....not all this fake accountancy tosh - they're paid for by BAe...yeah, right...a company we should be distancing ourselves from in my view, bearing the main responsibility IMO for our current lack of an MPA, rather than having them sponsor our aerobatics team. Failing that let's sign up a few drug cartels for the T shirts!
While we had an airforce they were a nice shiny bit of it that we were all proud of - now we're approaching the point where we have a world class aerobatics team but no airforce. We're the RAF, not ****ing Red Bull!
PR? Not needed, we should produce damn good PR about CAS in our current war theatre - did the RAF send out display teams in 1940, or did we rely on the 'real live PR' of contrails overhead? Recruiting - don't make me laugh, we don't need to recruit, we employ whole units simply to weed out the unsuitable! 'Getting the right type of recruit' - bolleux, and anyway it'd be cheaper to run a central London office and dine out candidates with impressive CVs...
Sorry, I think those reacting in horror to the OP (and I, initially, thought it was the bi monthly Reds basher initially, so I'm a convert) are being a tad Colonel Blimpish, in this climate survival should be a solid reason based on military capabilty, not showbiz. This is life, not X factor.
Discuss.
Dave
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's call a spade a spade.
Dave
Red Bull Air Force, I love that bit!
Herc, my concern is the public being led to believe the money is gong to good causes, but with the charity getting just 20 pence out of every 8 quid at the gate, maybe that could be made a bit clearer on the ticket.
Have a read at the accounts and you will see that they spent loads of that money on doing "stuff" as well as buying fuel. Some people will be doing rather well out of that. I don't object to companies making a profit but this smacks of being a bit close to a well known scam involving the Fire Service and books for schools.
Let's say I come up with a heart rending story. You get a million people to give us a quid each, I pass on all of what's left after we have paid the costs of generating that money. £123.45 ends up with the good cause since we had to pay (my mate) to build a website and advertise in (my other mate's) magazine and then we had to rent office space from the office rental company (run by my sister in-law) to have somewhere for the staff (our kids & their friends) to sit.
My cousin who has a classic car restoration business gets a chance to show off his stock and have his customers bring their cars along as an attraction for the punters to come to our open day. Obviously we agree to cover the costs of bringing the classic cars along as we will get money for the charity at the gate, based on punters coming to see the cars.
Cousin gets the business from the car owners who want to see their car look its best on the day, and everyone's a winner. Even the bloke next door to me who has a car transporter. He can charge the car owners whatever he wants, since the event organisers are picking up the costs of running the show.
Everyone is happy, even the "Target" as they have £123.45 more than they would otherwise have.
Any of this sounding familiar? I have no idea if any backs are being scratched in relation to RIAT and I am not suggesting that they are. I just wish to point out that it looks like some folk are doing very well out of the charity not getting much of the money.
Actually, it [Royal Air Force Charitable Trust Enterpises] is not a charity. It is a limited company. The Charity [Royal Air Force Charitable Trust] is funded by the "available profits" of the Limited Company. By the time they have paid all the fuel bills, hotels, caterers, aircraft operators and marketing people, the profits left are quite slim, and then a third of what they do pass to the Charity gets swallowed up in yet another layer of expenditure.
Winco, where did you get the idea that "the proceeds" from the events would be serious money?
Read the accounts from the link I posted earlier.
They got over 8 Million pounds in and disbursed £196,997 to Charitable causes. Perhaps you are right, maybe Waddington did make significant money, RIAT certainly did.
Less than 20 pence out of every 8 quid was distributed to service charities.
AP
Red Bull Air Force, I love that bit!
Herc, my concern is the public being led to believe the money is gong to good causes, but with the charity getting just 20 pence out of every 8 quid at the gate, maybe that could be made a bit clearer on the ticket.
Have a read at the accounts and you will see that they spent loads of that money on doing "stuff" as well as buying fuel. Some people will be doing rather well out of that. I don't object to companies making a profit but this smacks of being a bit close to a well known scam involving the Fire Service and books for schools.
Let's say I come up with a heart rending story. You get a million people to give us a quid each, I pass on all of what's left after we have paid the costs of generating that money. £123.45 ends up with the good cause since we had to pay (my mate) to build a website and advertise in (my other mate's) magazine and then we had to rent office space from the office rental company (run by my sister in-law) to have somewhere for the staff (our kids & their friends) to sit.
My cousin who has a classic car restoration business gets a chance to show off his stock and have his customers bring their cars along as an attraction for the punters to come to our open day. Obviously we agree to cover the costs of bringing the classic cars along as we will get money for the charity at the gate, based on punters coming to see the cars.
Cousin gets the business from the car owners who want to see their car look its best on the day, and everyone's a winner. Even the bloke next door to me who has a car transporter. He can charge the car owners whatever he wants, since the event organisers are picking up the costs of running the show.
Everyone is happy, even the "Target" as they have £123.45 more than they would otherwise have.
Any of this sounding familiar? I have no idea if any backs are being scratched in relation to RIAT and I am not suggesting that they are. I just wish to point out that it looks like some folk are doing very well out of the charity not getting much of the money.
Waste is frowned upon and i've lost count of the number of times Tim has reminded people RAFCTE is a charity.
Actually, it [Royal Air Force Charitable Trust Enterpises] is not a charity. It is a limited company. The Charity [Royal Air Force Charitable Trust] is funded by the "available profits" of the Limited Company. By the time they have paid all the fuel bills, hotels, caterers, aircraft operators and marketing people, the profits left are quite slim, and then a third of what they do pass to the Charity gets swallowed up in yet another layer of expenditure.
Winco, where did you get the idea that "the proceeds" from the events would be serious money?
I don't know where you get your figures from re Airshows, but certainly Waddo must have made some significant money this year, as the gates were closed I understand on both days. RIAT was sold out well before the show as it is an all ticket event. The proceeds from these events are then distributed to the service charities (not an insignificant sum) So which airshows are you refering too?
Read the accounts from the link I posted earlier.
They got over 8 Million pounds in and disbursed £196,997 to Charitable causes. Perhaps you are right, maybe Waddington did make significant money, RIAT certainly did.
Less than 20 pence out of every 8 quid was distributed to service charities.
AP
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets make a few quid for the charities.
Right then Willard, get this sorted out for next year.
We need to beat £300,000 from an £8 Million turnover, so if we have five airfields with four spotters a day paying £20 each for unlimited access, five days a week, that brings in over £100,000 in a year. Give them an old Runway Caravan (now called TRC) to sit in and take pictures from.
Ask any of your local spotters if they would pay £20 to get inside the wire and see how quickly they produce the cash.
No admin cost, dick someone with it as a secondary duty, advertise on UKAR & fightercontrol.co.uk to save money and get the "right" people.
Better still, how about.....
Every weekday we let 3 spotters pay £255 for a ridealong in an aircraft.
260 weekdays * £255 * 3 = £198,900
More money than the charity gets from the current setup. No leave block, no fod plod, no resentment towards those on nights who can wriggle out of the day duties in a blue suit.
Oh ****, wait a minute...No jobs for the boys, oh well, back to the drawing board.
We need to beat £300,000 from an £8 Million turnover, so if we have five airfields with four spotters a day paying £20 each for unlimited access, five days a week, that brings in over £100,000 in a year. Give them an old Runway Caravan (now called TRC) to sit in and take pictures from.
Ask any of your local spotters if they would pay £20 to get inside the wire and see how quickly they produce the cash.
No admin cost, dick someone with it as a secondary duty, advertise on UKAR & fightercontrol.co.uk to save money and get the "right" people.
Better still, how about.....
Every weekday we let 3 spotters pay £255 for a ridealong in an aircraft.
260 weekdays * £255 * 3 = £198,900
More money than the charity gets from the current setup. No leave block, no fod plod, no resentment towards those on nights who can wriggle out of the day duties in a blue suit.
Oh ****, wait a minute...No jobs for the boys, oh well, back to the drawing board.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The red arrows will continue to mess the minds of many military people for years to come. In 3 years there will be no military as we all watch re runs of top gear as each force tries to look cool in front of the BBC . Each getting attention to try and increase the budget for ones own need , with no concern for the people on the front line.
Im not cool , I just try to care
Im not cool , I just try to care
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 56
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bin the Reds!
The cuts are a disgrace. However, disbanding the Reds is not part of the answer. Funded by industry (largely) they also play a major recruitment role. Would be a shame not to hear them over Lincoln plus, why allow these penny pinching, self sustaining politicians another opportunity to make further cuts? Unless of course they need to further expand upon their own expense accounts!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Jungle
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you all want to save some money and put it back in the 'FL pot' (if thats where you honestly believe it goes), as is the crux of many an argument, then why don't you ask the Royal Navy to bring back the 18 aircrew they have in the USA at the moment, flying the Hornet? Not much point in those guys being there.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Midlands
Age: 84
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the current situation what trades are the RAF recruiting for? We have a large number of Harrier pilots with nothing to fly as of 15th Dec. They probably don't need to put that many pilots throught the training system in the next 12 months and there will be scores of applicants for every place. There are probably shortages in some trade groups but seeing the Red Arrows displaying their undoubted skills isn't going be that helpful IMO.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Back in Geordie Land
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
airpolice
I was commenting after the post that there was effectively no money being made at airshows this past year. I know that there were huge crowds at RIAT and waddo, so I assumed that there must have been some serioous money made, and your figures for RIAT concur that.
What a disgrace however, that such a paltry sum ends up to charity. I have long complained abouot the management of RIAT and how pathetic the final amount of money handed over is. I hope that someone from the charity commission takes a look at this and asks some searching questions about where £7.8 Million went. But thats another thread.
Foghorn Leghorn
I think that you make a perfectly valid point, and i would expand it further to looking at Wg Cdrs et al doing 'staff College' exchanges in such places as Australia. The cost is phenominal and is a waste. peopole will of course say that it is important that we broaden the minds of the future VSOs and I would have agreed with that once. However, there seems to me to be little point in broadening minds, exchanging military etho views and god knows what else with our military colleagues, if politicians are, at the end of the day, going to ignore the advice of our top brass, and I make direct reference here to Nimrod MRA4 which, allegedly, was faught for by the admirals and the CAS, ACAS, AOC etc. What is the point of having these experts at the top of our armed forces if those with the money completely ignore them??
Anyway, if anyone is interested, its snowing like stupid down here at HRW and I'm sat in my office with nowhere to go and no aircraft to fly!! Looks like i might be doing a lot of posting today!!
I was commenting after the post that there was effectively no money being made at airshows this past year. I know that there were huge crowds at RIAT and waddo, so I assumed that there must have been some serioous money made, and your figures for RIAT concur that.
What a disgrace however, that such a paltry sum ends up to charity. I have long complained abouot the management of RIAT and how pathetic the final amount of money handed over is. I hope that someone from the charity commission takes a look at this and asks some searching questions about where £7.8 Million went. But thats another thread.
Foghorn Leghorn
I think that you make a perfectly valid point, and i would expand it further to looking at Wg Cdrs et al doing 'staff College' exchanges in such places as Australia. The cost is phenominal and is a waste. peopole will of course say that it is important that we broaden the minds of the future VSOs and I would have agreed with that once. However, there seems to me to be little point in broadening minds, exchanging military etho views and god knows what else with our military colleagues, if politicians are, at the end of the day, going to ignore the advice of our top brass, and I make direct reference here to Nimrod MRA4 which, allegedly, was faught for by the admirals and the CAS, ACAS, AOC etc. What is the point of having these experts at the top of our armed forces if those with the money completely ignore them??
Anyway, if anyone is interested, its snowing like stupid down here at HRW and I'm sat in my office with nowhere to go and no aircraft to fly!! Looks like i might be doing a lot of posting today!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Fellow PPRUNERS, Let’s face it how long are the Reds going to last realistically? Not just in our current austere climate, but with the OSD of the Hawk T1 rapidly approaching it can only be 5 years max.
With the Hawk T1 due to be replaced under a PFI, there aren’t going to be sufficient aircraft to run an aerobatic team at weekends. So why don’t we face reality and pull the plug early, maybe rename the BBMF to the RAF Display Team and give them a couple of Hawks to keep going for a while, close Scampton and be done with it?
Also, once the bungling baron stops actively pushing Hawk sales will he carry on sponsoring the Reds ... no chance. The Hawk production line is effectively closed, we only build bits and India puts them together and yes I know they are chasing a big US contract but what are the chances of Uncle Sam buying an underpowered 40 year old design with a few computers put in? And with their recently announced job losses what’s the possibility of any sponsorship drying up rapidly?
The writing for the Reds demise is on the wall for all to see and although it maybe a few years off it is coming.
PS - I actually like them, just looking at the facts.
With the Hawk T1 due to be replaced under a PFI, there aren’t going to be sufficient aircraft to run an aerobatic team at weekends. So why don’t we face reality and pull the plug early, maybe rename the BBMF to the RAF Display Team and give them a couple of Hawks to keep going for a while, close Scampton and be done with it?
Also, once the bungling baron stops actively pushing Hawk sales will he carry on sponsoring the Reds ... no chance. The Hawk production line is effectively closed, we only build bits and India puts them together and yes I know they are chasing a big US contract but what are the chances of Uncle Sam buying an underpowered 40 year old design with a few computers put in? And with their recently announced job losses what’s the possibility of any sponsorship drying up rapidly?
The writing for the Reds demise is on the wall for all to see and although it maybe a few years off it is coming.
PS - I actually like them, just looking at the facts.
"Right then Willard, get this sorted out for next year.
We need to beat £300,000 from an £8 Million turnover, so if we have five airfields with four spotters a day paying £20 each for unlimited access, five days a week, that brings in over £100,000 in a year. Give them an old Runway Caravan (now called TRC) to sit in and take pictures from.
Ask any of your local spotters if they would pay £20 to get inside the wire and see how quickly they produce the cash.
No admin cost, dick someone with it as a secondary duty, advertise on UKAR & fightercontrol.co.uk to save money and get the "right" people. "
This spotter certainly would.
We need to beat £300,000 from an £8 Million turnover, so if we have five airfields with four spotters a day paying £20 each for unlimited access, five days a week, that brings in over £100,000 in a year. Give them an old Runway Caravan (now called TRC) to sit in and take pictures from.
Ask any of your local spotters if they would pay £20 to get inside the wire and see how quickly they produce the cash.
No admin cost, dick someone with it as a secondary duty, advertise on UKAR & fightercontrol.co.uk to save money and get the "right" people. "
This spotter certainly would.
Rigger1 that all sounds quite sensible up to the point where you suggest closing Scampton.
We can't close it, the Dog's buried there!
We can't close it, the Dog's buried there!
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Midlands
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you all want to save some money and put it back in the 'FL pot' (if thats where you honestly believe it goes), as is the crux of many an argument, then why don't you ask the Royal Navy to bring back the 18 aircrew they have in the USA at the moment, flying the Hornet? Not much point in those guys being there.