'Unknown' aircraft at Akrotiri
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I gather there's some childish/spotterish silliness going on as with any closed-shop in-joke that no one will explain to a genuine inquiry but that being so it evidently doesn't warrant an explanation.
Just as I hadn't realised a profile was expected to include qualifications that qualify one to recieve answers from self aggrandised saddos like you, chevron.
It's clearly too infantile to be worth explaining.
I'd expected more of this forum.
In this context, "If you don't know then you don't 'need' to know" is surely a parody of the bar room scene from Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels when Barry 'The Baptist' is briefing the two 'f****** Northern Monkeys' about the forthcoming robbery:
Gary: "So who's the Guv? Who we doing this for?"
Barry 'The Baptist': "You're doing it for me is all you need to know. You know because you need to know."
Gary: "I see, one of those `on a need to know' basis things, like in James Bond films?"
Barry 'The Baptist': "Careful, remember who's giving you this job. Right, I'm off. Call me when you're done. Ta-da."
Barry 'The Baptist': "You're doing it for me is all you need to know. You know because you need to know."
Gary: "I see, one of those `on a need to know' basis things, like in James Bond films?"
Barry 'The Baptist': "Careful, remember who's giving you this job. Right, I'm off. Call me when you're done. Ta-da."
Last edited by BEagle; 11th Jan 2019 at 17:03.
I think that must rate as one of the most arrogant, up yer own ass pig ignorant posts I've ever seen here, and that's saying something.
I gather there's some childish/spotterish silliness going on as with any closed-shop in-joke that no one will explain to a genuine inquiry but that being so it evidently doesn't warrant an explanation.
Just as I hadn't realised a profile was expected to include qualifications that qualify one to recieve answers from self aggrandised saddos like you, chevron.
It's clearly too infantile to be worth explaining.
I'd expected more of this forum.
I gather there's some childish/spotterish silliness going on as with any closed-shop in-joke that no one will explain to a genuine inquiry but that being so it evidently doesn't warrant an explanation.
Just as I hadn't realised a profile was expected to include qualifications that qualify one to recieve answers from self aggrandised saddos like you, chevron.
It's clearly too infantile to be worth explaining.
I'd expected more of this forum.
Hence the 'I didn't see this at X, Y and Z' type posts you are seeing.
Chevron -how could you be so insensitive and upset Meleagertoo in this way ---it's most unsporting of you and all over something nobody actually admits to seeing because it's never been there in the first place -that's if we knew where there was ...
Deuced bad form, a caddish trick to thus annoy a fellow.
Take a demerit.
Take a demerit.
Is there anybody with even a passing aviation interest in Cyprus who doesn't know that the U-2 has regularly operated from there for decades?
There have been multiple threads on here that mention it, for one thing.
Claiming "Need to Know" is rather precious - especially from the topic starter!
There have been multiple threads on here that mention it, for one thing.
Claiming "Need to Know" is rather precious - especially from the topic starter!
meleagertoo-for many years there have been certain aircraft types, involved in certain roles, where its much better if they were left quietly to get on with their own business, without the need for their locations to be publicised, or acknowledged. Mainly because their roles were largely of a highly sensitive nature-their positioning, or knowledge thereof, would be an advantage to an adversary.
Hence the 'I didn't see this at X, Y and Z' type posts you are seeing.
Hence the 'I didn't see this at X, Y and Z' type posts you are seeing.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK East Anglia
Age: 66
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When the wind was blowing in the wrong direction at Alconbury a plane like the one described never came into our hangar at Wyton for safe keeping.
A bowser would turn up to defuel those really big wing tanks ; )
A bowser would turn up to defuel those really big wing tanks ; )
Thread Starter
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
C'mon guys, cool it. I was one of the first to start this, back on post 10. Those in on the joke know, but let's not be critical of those who don't. It was an aircraft that was carrying out certain sensitive missions over sensitive territory, and the less we "ordinary people" knew of it's activities the better. Hence the "I didn't see it" idea arose. Just a jokey way of acknowledging it's existence, without asking questions of people who were not allowed to answer.
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: With hardship in an old Astra
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that must rate as one of the most arrogant, up yer own ass pig ignorant posts I've ever seen here, and that's saying something.
I gather there's some childish/spotterish silliness going on as with any closed-shop in-joke that no one will explain to a genuine inquiry but that being so it evidently doesn't warrant an explanation.
Just as I hadn't realised a profile was expected to include qualifications that qualify one to recieve answers from self aggrandised saddos like you, chevron.
It's clearly too infantile to be worth explaining.
I'd expected more of this forum.
I gather there's some childish/spotterish silliness going on as with any closed-shop in-joke that no one will explain to a genuine inquiry but that being so it evidently doesn't warrant an explanation.
Just as I hadn't realised a profile was expected to include qualifications that qualify one to recieve answers from self aggrandised saddos like you, chevron.
It's clearly too infantile to be worth explaining.
I'd expected more of this forum.
If I might be permitted an attempt at clarification, and maybe prevent any further unnecessary escalation.
As this is the military aviation forum, it is inevitable that some topics under discussion will encroach on matters which are subject to varying levels of military security classification (i.e. "secrecy").
Obviously all service personnel (both serving and former), having signed the Official Secrets Act, will not want to discuss topics on this public forum, which are still covered by current security classifications. However, occasionally a "reality clash" is encountered, where the security classification officially decreed for a particular activity, seems to be completely at odds with the realities of the situation.
As an example... how do you keep the presence of one of the noisiest, smokiest, aircraft in the world as a "secret"...?
Hence the occasional use in these threads, of "veiled" speech... or in the case of this particular thread, a repeated alluding to the hilarious pretence that the "secret" is somehow still a secret. Hence also, the equally hilarious tales of the ludicrous extents to which some senior personnel (many of whom were old enough and hairy enough to have known better), persisted in trying to deny the undeniable... rather than perhaps devoting their intellectual energies to finding and implementing more plausible and durable cover stories.
As for profiles, I would suggest that what you do with your profile is entirely up to you. Some people just can't wait to publish all their details accompanied by flashing lights [usually former Lightning pilots...! ;-) ]...
... others have done things that they have the humility not to brag about...
... others still wish to keep everybody guessing...
... others yet dream of aspiring to the very pinnacle of elite aircraft spotting...
... while there are those who decline to put most details in any form of online social media, as they wisely assess that sooner or later some malevolent web-trawling bot will use some of it against them.
In my humble opinion, I doubt very much whether any real arrogance has been deployed here. Being a forum frequented by many who are well-versed in military discipline, I am therefore sure that chevvron is more than capable of being witheringly arrogant / offensive, etc., if he/she ever chose to adopt such a stance... so the comparatively mild banter (particularly if you already understand the joke), which was levelled in response to your query, hardly qualifies as this. Starting, encouraging, and perpetuating banter is an important element of "Maintenance of Morale"... which is something that I would advocate becoming (and remaining forever) as second nature to all military leaders (at any level)... and even when taking into account "modern" sensitivities. (I have always counselled the "particularly sensitive", that they should perhaps reserve their full steaming outrage instead, for deploying against those that are actually firing live rounds at them... or worse.)
So, with respect, I would maybe urge caution against leaping too quickly into "defensive" mode and hurling around comments like "saddos" etc., ... otherwise many other people might inevitably form their own (but hopefully incorrect) adverse conclusions about your solidity of character. (Quiet, self-deprecating humour has been known to earn respect in the past... if a suitably witty, more brash riposte is not immediately to hand.)
Last edited by FollowTheSupper; 12th Jan 2019 at 00:00. Reason: sp. correction
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Posts: 657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
---------------
If I might be permitted an attempt at clarification, and maybe prevent any further unnecessary escalation.
As this is the military aviation forum, it is inevitable that some topics under discussion will encroach on matters which are subject to varying levels of military security classification (i.e. "secrecy").
Obviously all service personnel (both serving and former), having signed the Official Secrets Act, will not want to discuss topics on this public forum, which are still covered by current security classifications. However, occasionally a "reality clash" is encountered, where the security classification officially decreed for a particular activity, seems to be completely at odds with the realities of the situation.
As an example... how do you keep the presence of one of the noisiest, smokiest, aircraft in the world as a "secret"...?
Hence the occasional use in these threads, of "veiled" speech... or in the case of this particular thread, a repeated alluding to the hilarious pretence that the "secret" is somehow still a secret. Hence also, the equally hilarious tales of the ludicrous extents to which some senior personnel (many of whom were old enough and hairy enough to have known better), persisted in trying to deny the undeniable... rather than perhaps devoting their intellectual energies to finding and implementing more plausible and durable cover stories.
As for profiles, I would suggest that what you do with your profile is entirely up to you. Some people just can't wait to publish all their details accompanied by flashing lights [usually former Lightning pilots...! ;-) ]...
... others have done things that they have the humility not to brag about...
... others still wish to keep everybody guessing...
... others yet dream of aspiring to the very pinnacle of elite aircraft spotting...
... while there are those who decline to put most details in any form of online social media, as they wisely assess that sooner or later some malevolent web-trawling bot will use some of it against them.
In my humble opinion, I doubt very much whether any real arrogance has been deployed here. Being a forum frequented by many who are well-versed in military discipline, I am therefore sure that chevvron is more than capable of being witheringly arrogant / offensive, etc., if he/she ever chose to adopt such a stance... so the comparatively mild banter (particularly if you already understand the joke), which was levelled in response to your query, hardly qualifies as this. Starting, encouraging, and perpetuating banter is an important element of "Maintenance of Morale"... which is something that I would advocate becoming (and remaining forever) as second nature to all military leaders (at any level)... and even when taking into account "modern" sensitivities. (I have always counselled the "particularly sensitive", that they should perhaps reserve their full steaming outrage instead, for deploying against those that are actually firing live rounds at them... or worse.)
So, with respect, I would maybe urge caution against leaping too quickly into "defensive" mode and hurling around comments like "saddos" etc., ... otherwise many other people might inevitably form their own (but hopefully incorrect) adverse conclusions about your solidity of character. (Quiet, self-deprecating humour has been known to earn respect in the past... if a suitably witty, more brash riposte is not immediately to hand.)
If I might be permitted an attempt at clarification, and maybe prevent any further unnecessary escalation.
As this is the military aviation forum, it is inevitable that some topics under discussion will encroach on matters which are subject to varying levels of military security classification (i.e. "secrecy").
Obviously all service personnel (both serving and former), having signed the Official Secrets Act, will not want to discuss topics on this public forum, which are still covered by current security classifications. However, occasionally a "reality clash" is encountered, where the security classification officially decreed for a particular activity, seems to be completely at odds with the realities of the situation.
As an example... how do you keep the presence of one of the noisiest, smokiest, aircraft in the world as a "secret"...?
Hence the occasional use in these threads, of "veiled" speech... or in the case of this particular thread, a repeated alluding to the hilarious pretence that the "secret" is somehow still a secret. Hence also, the equally hilarious tales of the ludicrous extents to which some senior personnel (many of whom were old enough and hairy enough to have known better), persisted in trying to deny the undeniable... rather than perhaps devoting their intellectual energies to finding and implementing more plausible and durable cover stories.
As for profiles, I would suggest that what you do with your profile is entirely up to you. Some people just can't wait to publish all their details accompanied by flashing lights [usually former Lightning pilots...! ;-) ]...
... others have done things that they have the humility not to brag about...
... others still wish to keep everybody guessing...
... others yet dream of aspiring to the very pinnacle of elite aircraft spotting...
... while there are those who decline to put most details in any form of online social media, as they wisely assess that sooner or later some malevolent web-trawling bot will use some of it against them.
In my humble opinion, I doubt very much whether any real arrogance has been deployed here. Being a forum frequented by many who are well-versed in military discipline, I am therefore sure that chevvron is more than capable of being witheringly arrogant / offensive, etc., if he/she ever chose to adopt such a stance... so the comparatively mild banter (particularly if you already understand the joke), which was levelled in response to your query, hardly qualifies as this. Starting, encouraging, and perpetuating banter is an important element of "Maintenance of Morale"... which is something that I would advocate becoming (and remaining forever) as second nature to all military leaders (at any level)... and even when taking into account "modern" sensitivities. (I have always counselled the "particularly sensitive", that they should perhaps reserve their full steaming outrage instead, for deploying against those that are actually firing live rounds at them... or worse.)
So, with respect, I would maybe urge caution against leaping too quickly into "defensive" mode and hurling around comments like "saddos" etc., ... otherwise many other people might inevitably form their own (but hopefully incorrect) adverse conclusions about your solidity of character. (Quiet, self-deprecating humour has been known to earn respect in the past... if a suitably witty, more brash riposte is not immediately to hand.)
As it's Panto season:
You didn't see it because I told you to turn round so "IT'S BEHIND YOU"
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Posts: 657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C'mon guys, cool it. I was one of the first to start this, back on post 10. Those in on the joke know, but let's not be critical of those who don't. It was an aircraft that was carrying out certain sensitive missions over sensitive territory, and the less we "ordinary people" knew of it's activities the better. Hence the "I didn't see it" idea arose. Just a jokey way of acknowledging it's existence, without asking questions of people who were not allowed to answer.
A facade only slightly undermined by the Yanks then flogging T-Shirts for their beer swindle..... complete with a dirty great outline of a weather balloon that happened to look like a U-2. With the text 'Olive Harvest writ large beneath it !
You couldn't have made it up.
True.
CS
Last edited by cargosales; 12th Jan 2019 at 01:28.
A little off-track from a different part of the world, but still a comment on "security". scene is Pt. Moresby about 67 or 68 - my memory is going. Rumour that something is happening at the strip got a few of us out in time to see a KC135 appear. As soon as it stopped moving a guy leapt out with a handheld, yelling for a vehicle. Quite exciting as a U2 appeared and was talked down. Once he was parked by the tower everyone was very relaxed. The ground crew kept the cockpit closed, and we didn't get to chat to the driver, but otherwise we found out he was enroute Guam to East Sale, from where they were flying air sampling missions over Antartica. He apparently had a warning light, and Moresby was the nearest possible diversion. Don't know what his posittion on the 2800 nm. trip from Guam would have been, but there weren't too many 10,000 ft. strips available, and they apparently viewed Moresby as marginaly acceptable. So he had loitered for some unspecified time at some unspecified altitude while the KC 135 caught up.
The funny bit was that after about an hour of close inspection and chat by all and sundry, a police detachment arrived, with orders telexed from Canberra, to establish a perimeter of x 100yds around a non-existent a/c that no-one had seen.
I missed his departure next morning, but he apparently left the control zone out the top before passing the the end of the runway.
Not as good a "not there " as told by a friend who was Air America in the 60's. Question to refueller at a non-existent strip, "Whose are those six unmarked C130's ?". "I don't see no 130's".
Long time ago.
The funny bit was that after about an hour of close inspection and chat by all and sundry, a police detachment arrived, with orders telexed from Canberra, to establish a perimeter of x 100yds around a non-existent a/c that no-one had seen.
I missed his departure next morning, but he apparently left the control zone out the top before passing the the end of the runway.
Not as good a "not there " as told by a friend who was Air America in the 60's. Question to refueller at a non-existent strip, "Whose are those six unmarked C130's ?". "I don't see no 130's".
Long time ago.
Avoid imitations
Well at least we now know what U2 pilots wear under their pressure suits...pink trainers! 
