BBC coverage of RAF 100 years
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Add up all the bits Ppruners said should have been included, subtract a few bits that could have been left out, divide by 90, and see what you have.
Actually demonstrating the Lysander, still much a secret operation, and you have an educational bit for Joe Public, ditto John Tye and QRA.
The ATA, the photo device and the Bomber Command vets give the clue to the production. It was people centric not loads of old film clips.
BZ
Actually demonstrating the Lysander, still much a secret operation, and you have an educational bit for Joe Public, ditto John Tye and QRA.
The ATA, the photo device and the Bomber Command vets give the clue to the production. It was people centric not loads of old film clips.
BZ
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Right here, right now
Posts: 270
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And, even though there was quiet a lot of coverage of the Battle of Britain, there was not a single mention of Susannah York - probably much to the disgust of certain Pruners 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Then it shouldn't have been a single 90 minute programme. This should have been a multi-part series to do the subject real justice"
On a major BBC channel? are you kidding??
The BritPub want soaps, reality TV etc etc
You're lucky to have got one programme TBH
On a major BBC channel? are you kidding??
The BritPub want soaps, reality TV etc etc
You're lucky to have got one programme TBH
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: South East
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone who's been both a journo and a commercial heavy jet captain, I feel I have to break the sad news to a few pruners: the audience really don't care about the RAF's role in the inter-war years or whether the Scruggs wonder-jet was better in a dogfight than the Super Jackboot, or the magnificent work the kipper fleet did, or why British combat moustaches were superior to USAF ones. The viewers had scores of available TV channels to watch. That's why the BBC's only hope someone might watch this was if it was an entertainment presented by a Celeb and his brother. A ninety-minute detailed lecture from Air Vice Marshal WhenIwasOnTwelveSquadron wouldn't have stood much of a chance against Carrie Mathews on Homeland on C4!
Very surprised to hear that Sierra Leone Chinook Captain say that the crew were selected from singles/people without children!!
Did they know that they were selected on that basis, or was it just a clumsy way of saying volunteers were selected on that basis?
Did they know that they were selected on that basis, or was it just a clumsy way of saying volunteers were selected on that basis?
A ninety-minute detailed lecture from Air Vice Marshal WhenIwasOnTwelveSquadron wouldn't have stood much of a chance against Carrie Mathews on Homeland on C4
Our glorious BBC doesn't do that; does it?
Nemesis of the Proot Dynasty
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in Hampshire
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unlike most contributors, I found the overall programme to be somewhat disappointing. As at least two other contributors have mentioned, it seemed to be a publicity show for the McGregor brothers (and their mother [what the heck was she doing in it??]).
As has been pointed out, so much more was missing, than was included and why include a fatuous segment showing the brothers unloading 3 or 4 tons of potatoes from a DC3. Utterly unnecessary, since huge amounts of real footage is available.
As others have said, why was it not split into two or three episodes. Far more could have been included. I accept that there would still be omissions, but not as many as there were in this programme. And let me add, that the costs would not have been astronomical. How do I know, I’m a retired programme maker!!
As has been pointed out, so much more was missing, than was included and why include a fatuous segment showing the brothers unloading 3 or 4 tons of potatoes from a DC3. Utterly unnecessary, since huge amounts of real footage is available.
As others have said, why was it not split into two or three episodes. Far more could have been included. I accept that there would still be omissions, but not as many as there were in this programme. And let me add, that the costs would not have been astronomical. How do I know, I’m a retired programme maker!!
Overall I thought it was very effective and I liked the emphasis towards the end on the importance of people in the RAF’s history: exactly why Trenchard put such emphasis on training and expertise. The section about Halton with Cliff Spink was very good.
If you want comprehensive coverage of all aspects and Pathe News footage and all that jazz, then you have series like ‘The World at War’ and ‘Reaching for the Skies’, masterpieces for sure but there’s a reason they’re shown on the History Channel and not on prime time BBC1. To the high-profile omissions can be added Tornado, Buccaneer and Lightning (don’t think I even saw a Harrier either) but it’s missing the point of the programme to get wrapped up in that.
The *one* area I would criticise has already been mentioned. After the treatment of the BofB and the Bomber offensive, the narrator said something like “but there was another largely unsung effort which was critical to winning the war”. Aha, I thought, they’re heading for a 10/10 now; unfortunately it wasn’t Coastal Command which followed, but photo recce. I’ve dug out my copy of Terraine to remind everyone:
“Operation OVERLORD was the supreme offensive action of the Western Allies in the war. It could not have taken place without the Atlantic victory to which Coastal Command made such a magnificent contribution”.
Welcome back 120 Sqn (soon)!
If you want comprehensive coverage of all aspects and Pathe News footage and all that jazz, then you have series like ‘The World at War’ and ‘Reaching for the Skies’, masterpieces for sure but there’s a reason they’re shown on the History Channel and not on prime time BBC1. To the high-profile omissions can be added Tornado, Buccaneer and Lightning (don’t think I even saw a Harrier either) but it’s missing the point of the programme to get wrapped up in that.
The *one* area I would criticise has already been mentioned. After the treatment of the BofB and the Bomber offensive, the narrator said something like “but there was another largely unsung effort which was critical to winning the war”. Aha, I thought, they’re heading for a 10/10 now; unfortunately it wasn’t Coastal Command which followed, but photo recce. I’ve dug out my copy of Terraine to remind everyone:
“Operation OVERLORD was the supreme offensive action of the Western Allies in the war. It could not have taken place without the Atlantic victory to which Coastal Command made such a magnificent contribution”.
Welcome back 120 Sqn (soon)!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,894
Received 2,834 Likes
on
1,210 Posts
A bit disappointing, there is more to the RAF than fighters, the other stuff seemed to be a token add on, and never covered some parts, it also seemed to miss out everything the RAF has done between WW1, WW2, the Falklands and modern times, it also felt more like a McGregor roadshow than a history of the RAF, some posts say Colin is a good chap etc, well he might well be, but he should stick at what he is good , because as a presenter he came over as very wooden and boring to watch.. Why oh why do they fill these programmes with presenters and ther families, I half expected him to bring his dog out and tell you it was named after......Euan is a good narrator, we don't need to see him all the way through the programmes.
Totally agree it should have been over several episodes to do it justice.
I see the robbed the Battle of Britain film archive for colour film to show the adversaries in their Merlin powered ME109's and Heinkel 111, they started the RAF Halton clip, home of the other ranks by showing the officers mess, shame they didn't start with the apprentice blocks which would have been more representative.
Totally agree it should have been over several episodes to do it justice.
I see the robbed the Battle of Britain film archive for colour film to show the adversaries in their Merlin powered ME109's and Heinkel 111, they started the RAF Halton clip, home of the other ranks by showing the officers mess, shame they didn't start with the apprentice blocks which would have been more representative.
Last edited by NutLoose; 26th Mar 2018 at 20:27.
high spirits;
Exactly.
As deepknight succinctly put it;
Aunty Beeb may be a public service company , but they know where the real money is. They made a good attempt with this one , but after that , it's back to business as usual. However , it might just encourage some of Joe Public to delve deeper and go search out the hours of RAF stuff available on History , Yesterday and , yes, You Tube.
It was designed for the public, not for military types. Enjoyed it for what it was personally.
As deepknight succinctly put it;
As someone who's been both a journo and a commercial heavy jet captain, I feel I have to break the sad news to a few pruners: the audience really don't care about the RAF's role in the inter-war years or whether the Scruggs wonder-jet was better in a dogfight than the Super Jackboot, or the magnificent work the kipper fleet did, or why British combat moustaches were superior to USAF ones. The viewers had scores of available TV channels to watch. That's why the BBC's only hope someone might watch this was if it was an entertainment presented by a Celeb and his brother. A ninety-minute detailed lecture from Air Vice Marshal WhenIwasOnTwelveSquadron wouldn't have stood much of a chance against Carrie Mathews on Homeland on C4!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Age: 58
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A fine summary of what some others have said. Nothing more, nothing less. Nothing more than we expect.
It was on the BBC, as others have said, for the public at large, Did you really expect anything different? Yeah, there was a lot of the brothers, but that it was what makes TV that sells. I thought it was great PR for the RAF too. Not something the RAF seems to be very good at.
BGG
It was on the BBC, as others have said, for the public at large, Did you really expect anything different? Yeah, there was a lot of the brothers, but that it was what makes TV that sells. I thought it was great PR for the RAF too. Not something the RAF seems to be very good at.
BGG
I thought it shallow beyond words and the more I think about it the more I get annoyed.
I'm not going to bother watching it again but the lasting impression I have of the ground trades is that they pick up spilled spuds.
And the anecdote about 'keys being thrown on the table', what was that included for? Added nothing except to make the whole ATA experience seem a 'jolly good wheeze' for well spoken ladies.
I am sure those 2 amazing pilots have more than a fair share of decent pull up a sandbag stories that would have been much more worthy of air time.
How can you do 100 years of RAF history and miss out 45 years of RAF involvement in the Cold War.
I was not looking for a Raymond Baxter type documentary but something with a bit of bite and with substance. I thought it trite and dull.
Message Ends
I really enjoyed the program, which seemed a lot shorter and quicker than the 90 mins it took to watch! However, the areas left out were marked. No Coastal Command, no Maritime, no Burma, no NEAF, no FEAF, no North Africa, no inter-war, no air defence, only a hint of the cold war, a hint at transport, a hint the helo force, a hint at the Falklands but only a well deserved contribution from a from bona mate, no AEW, very little of any support function, eg. RAF Regiment, ATC, met, firemen, Signals, armourers, fairies, airframes, engines, scuffers, suppliers, chefs, stewards, batties, MT, medics, dentists, pardres, int, linguists, imagery analysts, communications, admin, lineys, edjucamaters, stewards, squippers, sooties, sim techs, photogs, kennel maids, along with many others that do not readily spring to mind. (Oops,- add movers). The ladies of the ATA, fascinating, but a very peripheral part of the RAF, featured too much. This program would appear to be a perfect overture for a much more detailed work. A good and promising start with much potential for advancement, should the opportunities presented be grasped fully.
Last edited by cynicalint; 26th Mar 2018 at 23:50.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,894
Received 2,834 Likes
on
1,210 Posts
One thing I thought they skated over was the fact in WW1 they used to carry a pistol to top themselves in a fire as they had no parachutes, they failed to mention the opposition had them and the only reason ours didn't was higher command thought they would be jumping out of aircraft left right and centre instead of trying to save them, thus the mortality rate was higher as you lost experienced pilots and replaced them with canon fodder.
The ladies of the ATA, fascinating, but a very peripheral part of the RAF, featured too much.
May have been understandable when women in uniform were a novelty but it gets tiresome after a while. I know I do bang on about this, but what is PPRuNe for if not "banging on"?
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: over the rainbow
Age: 75
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In WWII, the USSR had women flying as fighter pilots and one of Germany's finest test pilots was a woman.
Whereas in Britain it was ok for French and Anglo-French women to join the SOE and be flown into occupied France where many were captured, tortured and executed. Just as long as it was kept secret.
Even in the post WWII Royal Air Force women were not able to "join up". Instead they had to join the Royal Air Force equivalent of the Girl Guides and where they restricted to ground roles.
Of course the important role of women in the ATA during WWII should be promoted.
The idea that only men should fly fast jets reflects the insecurity of men in British society, not women.
Whereas in Britain it was ok for French and Anglo-French women to join the SOE and be flown into occupied France where many were captured, tortured and executed. Just as long as it was kept secret.
Even in the post WWII Royal Air Force women were not able to "join up". Instead they had to join the Royal Air Force equivalent of the Girl Guides and where they restricted to ground roles.
Of course the important role of women in the ATA during WWII should be promoted.
The idea that only men should fly fast jets reflects the insecurity of men in British society, not women.