2 Group Commercial Arm
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: In the Ether
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First off - the Chicago Convention is far from a Red Herring - look into its detail and you'll see that it defines how commercial aviation operates today on a global basis! You ignore it merely because its application makes your ideas fail!
Reservists are just that - in reserve - until activated. No Reservist sits in the seat of his Virgin jet under the command of HMG! Therefore not an issue under International Law.
If this is such an inspired idea, then why isn't it in operation today? In short, because no-one will underwrite the commercial risk of operating aircraft larger than a King Air in high-risk regions. At what point would the prospective 'leasing agent' turn round and say "nope, too dangerous" or "we're not trained for that"?
Answer: When the lessees insurers won't pay for the prospective loss of a £180m C17 at BIA or similar.
That is what it comes down to, and that is the downfall of your work of genius. End of.
Reservists are just that - in reserve - until activated. No Reservist sits in the seat of his Virgin jet under the command of HMG! Therefore not an issue under International Law.
If this is such an inspired idea, then why isn't it in operation today? In short, because no-one will underwrite the commercial risk of operating aircraft larger than a King Air in high-risk regions. At what point would the prospective 'leasing agent' turn round and say "nope, too dangerous" or "we're not trained for that"?
Answer: When the lessees insurers won't pay for the prospective loss of a £180m C17 at BIA or similar.
That is what it comes down to, and that is the downfall of your work of genius. End of.
Last edited by Uncle Ginsters; 28th Feb 2011 at 21:07.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: England
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't follow what dual registration would have brought to the table. The MoD does charter civilian aircraft whenever suitable. But surely aircraft flying under civilian rules would not have been able to fly into the Libyan desert without permission (whether owned by MoD or not)? Correct that if I'm wrong as I know little about civilian rules. Had permission been obtainable and the job safe, I'm pretty sure given how stretched the Hercs are that civilian charters would have been used.
You are suggesting it is wrong for the military to take work away from civilian operators. Agreed and there are rules in place to prevent it. If your suggestion is aimed at preventing a hypothetical reliance on a free taxpayer-funded evacuation at the expense of commercial operators then I see your point, but it isn't necessary for the aircraft to be on the civil register to charge pax fares. I know too little about what went on to speculate whether anyone was reckless in this case. But, in general, if you argued that MoD should recover the costs from any company or individuals who were reckless, then that makes sense but it doesn't require a commercial arm.
You are suggesting it is wrong for the military to take work away from civilian operators. Agreed and there are rules in place to prevent it. If your suggestion is aimed at preventing a hypothetical reliance on a free taxpayer-funded evacuation at the expense of commercial operators then I see your point, but it isn't necessary for the aircraft to be on the civil register to charge pax fares. I know too little about what went on to speculate whether anyone was reckless in this case. But, in general, if you argued that MoD should recover the costs from any company or individuals who were reckless, then that makes sense but it doesn't require a commercial arm.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chaps
There's a lot of hot air around here! I think you'd be very surprised about the level of risk that the insurance brokers are willing to allow (not take!) for the appropriate amount of money.
A lot of Trim Stab's stuff is a fallacy, but he's right on the money on the insurance. UG, sorry but you aren't in this case.
There's a lot of hot air around here! I think you'd be very surprised about the level of risk that the insurance brokers are willing to allow (not take!) for the appropriate amount of money.
A lot of Trim Stab's stuff is a fallacy, but he's right on the money on the insurance. UG, sorry but you aren't in this case.
3) Some aircraft could be painted in civilian dayglo colours, so not regarded as threatening, and less risk of being mistaken as hostile, as occurred with the C130 shot at going into Libya. They would still be available for wartime reserve if necessary. This is the model followed by Civil Guards in some European countries, eg Securité Civile in France.
If so, please seek psychiatric assistance.
As for the rest, it probably has merits but I am past caring.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: In the Ether
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TE: noted, and thanks for setting my speculation straight.
I still believe that the idea is flawed.
Clearedtoroll - that's the middle-ground required here. Agreed.
Would anyone care to speculate as to why, in this case, the commercial world did not step up straight away...i fail to believe that the RAF beat them to it!
I still believe that the idea is flawed.
Clearedtoroll - that's the middle-ground required here. Agreed.
Would anyone care to speculate as to why, in this case, the commercial world did not step up straight away...i fail to believe that the RAF beat them to it!
Thread Starter
MGD
Are you seriously trying to suggest there is less risk in flying a dayglo C130 into Libya uninvited?
Would anyone care to speculate as to why, in this case, the commercial world did not step up straight away...i fail to believe that the RAF beat them to it!
A commercially aware branch of 2 Group, with suitably qualified aircrrew and suitable aircraft could have done a superb job in the current situation - as it stands it is all a bit flakey.
Last edited by Trim Stab; 28th Feb 2011 at 21:28.
Thread Starter
Whinging civvies
However civilian evacuation or transport is a civilian task - which is why a commercial arm of 2 Group could carry out the task very well, and in some circumstances, better than purely civilian aircrew - which is the point of the thread.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: In the Ether
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You answer your own argument - those bases not evacuated are run by apparently irresponsible companies, not those who would have bid for your glorious saviour services.
Therefore they are not your business, they never were and never would have been. Get over it.
It's a shame that our Servicemen have had to pick up the pieces from less scrupulous companies, but that's how is!
Therefore they are not your business, they never were and never would have been. Get over it.
It's a shame that our Servicemen have had to pick up the pieces from less scrupulous companies, but that's how is!
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Perth Australia
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well just for your interest a civilian company was going in before the C130 and are still going in up to today, doing 3 flights a day evacuating all nations.
The C130 ops that entered Libya without a permit just made their job more dangerous.
The C130 ops that entered Libya without a permit just made their job more dangerous.
