RAF Rivet Joint

[TroutMaster]

Martin, is your point that it's okay to break OPSEC here because others do on other sites?

Why is it okay at all, anywhere?

I suppose it depends on perspective. If you are safely on the ground and know about timings because you are close to the program, or know someone who is (and you want to impress the hell out of everyone), then you might be inclined to post with a certain abandon. Dr Pepper, and all that.

However, if you are sat in the jet, you will be disinclined to publicly post your operating times, (or, say, if you have family in the jet).

Anybody know any interesting stories about people in the job posting things up that they shouldn't?

I do, it wasn't a happy outcome.

Sorry to be all doom and gloom, just making a point of order.

TM

[dervish]

Chugalug

Good reply. IIRC from the evidence to Phillip the FADEC was not allowed in the aircraft either which is a hell of a constraint when you want to start up engines!

[TEEEJ]

[OafOrfUxAche]

TEEEJ,

How did you manage to subvert the 'minimum 10 characters in a post' rule? Do tell!

[Willard Whyte]

Martin, is your point that it's okay to break OPSEC here because others do on other sites?

Why is it okay at all, anywhere?

I suppose it depends on perspective. If you are safely on the ground and know about timings because you are close to the program, or know someone who is (and you want to impress the hell out of everyone), then you might be inclined to post with a certain abandon. Dr Pepper, and all that.

As a result of our free and capitalistic society members of the public have ready access to watches and cameras, amongst other things. Pretty sure some spotter watching from the provided area just off the A15 (N53 10'33 W 0 30'45) could just as easily post the info. Tough job making a 'plane the size of an RJ invisible in broad daylight and good weather.

[BEagle]

Ugly



.

[Toadstool]

Ugly

Best get rid of it then.

[The Helpful Stacker]

Lumpy


Sneaky

[Squirrel 41]

Dumb question time.

Are the engines / engines + pylons interchangeable with the E-3Ds?

S41

[Lima Juliet]

Squirrel 41

I believe that E-3D is CFM56-2A and RJ is CFM56-2B. The E-3D has thrust reversers but the RJ doesn't. Also E-3D's CFMs create more thrust but weigh more (due to reversers)

LJ

[TroutMaster]

Willard and Just This Once.....u seem to be trying to be clever, but you have missed the point. The spotters spotted the plane as it came in, having been (disappointingly) forewarned. The press release was after it landed.

OPSEC was broken when the landing time and refuelling point was posted at @0220. Do try to follow the story.

Let's be clear, though, you long time posters think this is okay, right?

It's an interesting debate no?

Do you think it's okay to post timings like this?

Are you military? Good debate, eh?

TM

[Wensleydale]

Pretty short debate as the flightplan is published at the scary classification level of 'unclassified' and is sent to numerous FIRs. In equal regard the flight details are broadcast free-to-air.

Much like all the operations over the Balkans back in the 1990s then!

[Wensleydale]

Like This you mean

[Wensleydale]

How did you manage to subvert the 'minimum 10 characters in a post' rule? Do tell!

I suppose he used the same method as my previous post. Simples!

[TroutMaster]

The debate worked out fine. You obviously have no real appreciation of OPSEC. Flight Plans are 'free to air', but finding them (and any other info) is so much easier when people in the know helpfully post up accurate routes and timings. The last person I know who, (using his position in the RAF), released timings in this manner to a spotters site got a formal warning. I recall MP's went through that person's PC hard drive. That's not open to any debate whatsoever, it's a fact. That flight was flightplanned, and it wasn't that long ago...

I'm astonished that some (military, or ex military) people take this careless, 'what's the point' attitude. It's an attitude I would expected from someone who doesn't give a damn about the safety of the people on board, and, to a lesser extent, the job they are trying to do.

Well, some people do still care about both.


TM

[Party Animal]

You obviously have no real appreciation of OPSEC

Actually Trouters, I'm not sure you do! Aircraft details and timings should not be advertised when they are related to 'operational' events. The delivery of a brand new aircraft that has been widely advertised in a variety of media outlets has no more risk attached to it than any typical airshow weekend where the display timings are advertised well in advance. Similarly, it is probably safe to say that a Typhoon will be flying at Coningsby tomorrow. That is not restricted information and even less rocket science or OPSEC breaking.

In this case, how exactly do you percieve the safety of those on board was compromised by a bunch of spotters discussing the arrival time? Likewise, how does it impact on the job the crew were trying to do, i.e, deliver an aircraft from A to B?

[Willard Whyte]

Well said PA.

TM, get a life. Oh, and stop trying to be so patronising - it makes you come across as a bit of a c0ck.

[NoVANav]

This is a NON-operation delivery! No OPSEC needed!

OPSEC is defined as "Operations Security". Since this is a factory delivery and "operations" will not begin officially until next year then the flight does not meet the definition.

BTW, when we deployed from the US to the UK we had an air-refueling over Maine, flying non-stop. Not sure why they would stop except the RAF aircrew are not qualified for boom A/R.

[TEEEJ]

OafOrfUxAche,

I have no idea? I just posted the You Tube link and it accepted my post.

Some nice images of ZZ664 at following links.

Photos: Boeing RC-135W (717-158) Aircraft Pictures | !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Photos: Boeing RC-135W (717-158) Aircraft Pictures | !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Photos: Boeing RC-135W (717-158) Aircraft Pictures | !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Squirrel 41]

Leon - many thanks!