Red White and Blue Voyager
I think the point being missed by the likes of Andy Netherwood complaining that the scheme would make the aircraft unusable for tasks such as daylight landings into Basra or Bastion is that this Government (and most likely its next few successors) has zero interest in getting involved in a new campaign of the type where:
1) Troop movements are needed into an airfield subject to a visually-laid threat;
2) The number and intensity of movements is such that one aircraft couldn’t be excluded from the Voyager plot;
3) The duration of the airlift was too long for exceptions to (2) to be manageable with the substantial additional mitigation of ‘night movements only’ for this one aircraft;
by which I mean that it has no interest in getting tangled up in another TELIC or HERRICK and thus can afford to take decisions such as this. As for air refuelling, well, something has gone *very* wrong if mitigations equivalent to points 2 and 3 above have not been possible, the DCA screen has failed, and an unfortunate tanker crew is forced to rely on a low vis paint scheme to keep themselves safe from enemy fighters. At that point, the infinitesimal extra mitigation it might provide is so close to worthless that you barely need to predict any benefit to justify the alternate scheme.
Justin Bronk has correctly identified the more contentious argument as being one of cost attribution, although really the paint scheme doesn’t change the substance: just brings it into sharper relief! It’s been observed that the PFI effectively protects Voyager from salami-slicing, which reduces MOD’s room for manoeuvre in the upcoming review, so if this paint scheme helps MOD develop an argument to extract a greater share of the PFI costs from other departments then maybe it will prove to have been a wise investment from that point of view alone. Who am I kidding, though... the PFI is a whacking great amount to quote towards the 2% GDP target so attributing it all to ‘Defence’ remains more likely.
1) Troop movements are needed into an airfield subject to a visually-laid threat;
2) The number and intensity of movements is such that one aircraft couldn’t be excluded from the Voyager plot;
3) The duration of the airlift was too long for exceptions to (2) to be manageable with the substantial additional mitigation of ‘night movements only’ for this one aircraft;
by which I mean that it has no interest in getting tangled up in another TELIC or HERRICK and thus can afford to take decisions such as this. As for air refuelling, well, something has gone *very* wrong if mitigations equivalent to points 2 and 3 above have not been possible, the DCA screen has failed, and an unfortunate tanker crew is forced to rely on a low vis paint scheme to keep themselves safe from enemy fighters. At that point, the infinitesimal extra mitigation it might provide is so close to worthless that you barely need to predict any benefit to justify the alternate scheme.
Justin Bronk has correctly identified the more contentious argument as being one of cost attribution, although really the paint scheme doesn’t change the substance: just brings it into sharper relief! It’s been observed that the PFI effectively protects Voyager from salami-slicing, which reduces MOD’s room for manoeuvre in the upcoming review, so if this paint scheme helps MOD develop an argument to extract a greater share of the PFI costs from other departments then maybe it will prove to have been a wise investment from that point of view alone. Who am I kidding, though... the PFI is a whacking great amount to quote towards the 2% GDP target so attributing it all to ‘Defence’ remains more likely.
Last edited by Easy Street; 22nd Jun 2020 at 10:48.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: back of beyond
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although we now view Concorde through the rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia, let us not forget the furore about the waste of the taxpayers' £750 million.
Yet that money bought the country and the airline priceless prestige and publicity all round the world.
I remember being at Twickenham's rugby sevens in the 80s when Concorde appeared on finals for LHR.
The whole stadium burst into a version of the BA anthem of the time.
That 's what an image can do for you. British ambassadors of the past reported that invitations to the royal yacht could boost British trade by billions.
Yet that money bought the country and the airline priceless prestige and publicity all round the world.
I remember being at Twickenham's rugby sevens in the 80s when Concorde appeared on finals for LHR.
The whole stadium burst into a version of the BA anthem of the time.
That 's what an image can do for you. British ambassadors of the past reported that invitations to the royal yacht could boost British trade by billions.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Former Home of the Hercules, Wilts
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know what all the fuss is about the MOD core fleet is 9 aircraft including the civil registered one in Ait Tanker titles which is used on the South Atlantic schedule yet since 336 was "modified" into a VIP aircraft there are now 10 in full time RAF use. Personally I think the VIP aircraft should be in a more appropriate colour than grey as long as it is done with style and not tacky like the modern RAF branding used next to the aircraft doors.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA used to paint the tops their aircraft grey and many considered it very smart. By the same token there's nothing wrong with a grey Voyager.
(At the time, KLM said they painted the top half of their aircraft blue to match the sky - I fancied that BA chose grey to match the skies over London.)
(At the time, KLM said they painted the top half of their aircraft blue to match the sky - I fancied that BA chose grey to match the skies over London.)
Borrowed from another military site... “PM’s jet respray nears completion”
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,180
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,693
Received 99 Likes
on
47 Posts
