Voyager Parties
Voyagers – known as the petrol stations of the skies – support sorties by RAF Lightning and Typhoon strike aircraft used for precision bombing of Islamic State strongholds in Iraq.
Well, I hope the crewmembers concerned are punished suitably. I'm more angry about the 'source', though. Portraying what could just as easily be termed a 'concern for safety' as 'desire for revenge' compounds the entirely avoidable reputational damage wrought by airing such dirty laundry. So now, instead of looking like an organisation dealing appropriately with its miscreants, we appear to be a spiteful, point-scoring bunch of individuals. I recognise that it's all too easy to fall into the trap of shooting the messenger, but in this case the legitimate messenger was whoever called the police. All the 'source' has done is made an already bad situation much worse. From the candid, ill-considered nature of the comments, I wonder whether they even realised they were talking to a journalist...
Last edited by Easy Street; 30th Aug 2020 at 08:39.
Well, I hope the crewmembers concerned are punished suitably. I'm more angry about the 'source', though. Portraying what could just as easily be termed a 'concern for safety' as 'desire for revenge' compounds the entirely avoidable reputational damage wrought by airing such dirty laundry. So now, instead of looking like an organisation dealing appropriately with its miscreants, we appear to be a spiteful, point-scoring bunch of individuals. I recognise that it's all too easy to fall into the trap of shooting the messenger, but in this case the legitimate messenger was whoever called the police. All the 'source' has done is made an already bad situation much worse. From the candid, ill-considered nature of the comments, I wonder whether they even realised they were talking to a journalist...
Depending where people stand, this will either be those saying it is spiteful, or someone potentially saving an aircraft and more importantly lives.
Disappointing you have been taken in by a report in the DM. There is a report, re members of crew being removed from an aircraft. The rest is, at the moment, just a story, unless you know differently. But it makes for a story.
Depending where people stand, this will either be those saying it is spiteful, or someone potentially saving an aircraft and more importantly lives.
Depending where people stand, this will either be those saying it is spiteful, or someone potentially saving an aircraft and more importantly lives.
Anyway, ways of working at the heart of government mean that unnamed 'sources' carry more weight with the public than they really should.
What I find most shocking is that tanker crews were forced to sleep on base. Times must really be tight..
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: England
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Stockport MAN/EGCC
Age: 70
Posts: 991
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Just one more reason not to read that scurrilous rag.
ONLY three things correctly reported in there
Date
Price
Horoscope
everythin else is made up or fiction
David
ONLY three things correctly reported in there
Date
Price
Horoscope
everythin else is made up or fiction
David
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
When I had the virtues of flight safety drilled into me, it actually didn't matter about the rank, qualification, role or the ultimate intent of the person reporting a potential flight safety incident, all that mattered was you had the integrity and moral fortitude to try and prevent something quite terrible from happening to our brethren in the aviation community.
If you want to protect the reputation of the service, you might want to think about that before you publicly act in a way that causes others to think there might be a flight safety issue. This is nothing to do with the reporting or information source standards of a gutter rag I wouldn't wipe my arse with, and everything to do with professional standards. This incident is a long way from reaching its legal and judicial conclusion, but it's already a massive own goal, whatever the outcome.
You already said "don't attack the messenger" and yet proceed to do exactly that.
If you want to protect the reputation of the service, you might want to think about that before you publicly act in a way that causes others to think there might be a flight safety issue. This is nothing to do with the reporting or information source standards of a gutter rag I wouldn't wipe my arse with, and everything to do with professional standards. This incident is a long way from reaching its legal and judicial conclusion, but it's already a massive own goal, whatever the outcome.
You already said "don't attack the messenger" and yet proceed to do exactly that.
Any word on the Lightning and the Typhoon? Did they go to another petrol station, or are they still up there?
If you read my post again, carefully this time, you will note that I drew a distinction between the person who (correctly) notified the authorities and the 'source' who spilled the story to the press. There's no integrity or moral fortitude involved in the latter, just unthinking, damaging spitefulness.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mid-central South of England
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there actually a Mg limit for breath or blood testing aircrew laid down now then? The old no drinking within 50ft of the aircraft and moderate drinking in the 24 ft beyond that kind of rule did leave it open to interpretation and I’d guess make it harder to secure any conviction at a CM or in civilian court?