Another rant from the Bearded One
I refer you all to my previous post #5.........
By quoting from his book, and discussing it/him, you are providing him with the oxygen he needs to breathe.
This is supposed to be a network for Professional Pilots and their Professional supporting folk.
If you are in one of those categories, then great.
If you were there, then your opinion might be valid - if not, then you are just offering a speculative opinion.
If you are in the latter category, then please take your opinions elsewhere.
At working level, the RN and RAF have got on very well together to do the task that was/is necessary.
It is very unfortunate that some 40 years after the Falklands, we are still having to deal with irrational and deep rooted paranoia.
The current people that are having to get on with joint operations deserve better.
By quoting from his book, and discussing it/him, you are providing him with the oxygen he needs to breathe.
This is supposed to be a network for Professional Pilots and their Professional supporting folk.
If you are in one of those categories, then great.
If you were there, then your opinion might be valid - if not, then you are just offering a speculative opinion.
If you are in the latter category, then please take your opinions elsewhere.
At working level, the RN and RAF have got on very well together to do the task that was/is necessary.
It is very unfortunate that some 40 years after the Falklands, we are still having to deal with irrational and deep rooted paranoia.
The current people that are having to get on with joint operations deserve better.
This crater caused problems with UK forces after the Argentine surrender. RAF News, April 26th 2002, has a piece from retired Air Commodore John Davis. Davis was the first commander of the operations wing at RAF Stanley. In relation to the runway crater from the first Black Buck mission Davis wrote "This rogue crater required a succession of repairs amid what soon became high intensity air operations."
Seems to me that most of the current/ex-RN/RAF on here agree that the Falklands War was more a Navy Op than a RAF Op, whereas GW1/2 were more an RAF Op than a Navy Op.
No surprise there as we all actually do Joint Ops quite well.
Then there's trolls trying to do what they do....troll.
No surprise there as we all actually do Joint Ops quite well.
Then there's trolls trying to do what they do....troll.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,808
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
ummm ... yes, and it was almost ever thus.
Although Wellington in the Peninsula War managed to keep the Navy on-side, thus ensuring his logistics chain. They didn’t get much credit for that, but made a vital contribution to the whole. Isn’t that what All-Arms battles, and Combined Forces, is all about ... instead of infantile single-Service willy-waving?
Although Wellington in the Peninsula War managed to keep the Navy on-side, thus ensuring his logistics chain. They didn’t get much credit for that, but made a vital contribution to the whole. Isn’t that what All-Arms battles, and Combined Forces, is all about ... instead of infantile single-Service willy-waving?
ummm ... yes, and it was almost ever thus.
Although Wellington in the Peninsula War managed to keep the Navy on-side, thus ensuring his logistics chain. They didn’t get much credit for that, but made a vital contribution to the whole. Isn’t that what All-Arms battles, and Combined Forces, is all about ... instead of infantile single-Service willy-waving?
Although Wellington in the Peninsula War managed to keep the Navy on-side, thus ensuring his logistics chain. They didn’t get much credit for that, but made a vital contribution to the whole. Isn’t that what All-Arms battles, and Combined Forces, is all about ... instead of infantile single-Service willy-waving?
