Tornados
Originally Posted by zetec2
So where are all the groundcrew that made this happen & kept those steely eyed killers in the air, seems awfully unbalanced ?.
Good old Pprune.
It never fails to disappoint.
Even when someone posts an old photo, to satisfy the usual reminiscences, the first few comments bring complaints and whinges.
Maybe just say “wow, cool photo!”. If if you can’t bring yourself to say that maybe say nothing at all.
I think we all know the aircrew didn’t fix the jets and tow them out there themselves. I also think we know what you’re getting at with the ground crew comments. Could you imagine though trying to corral an extra 1000 engineers into the photo?
It doesn’t bear thinking about.
BV
Even when someone posts an old photo, to satisfy the usual reminiscences, the first few comments bring complaints and whinges.
Maybe just say “wow, cool photo!”. If if you can’t bring yourself to say that maybe say nothing at all.
I think we all know the aircrew didn’t fix the jets and tow them out there themselves. I also think we know what you’re getting at with the ground crew comments. Could you imagine though trying to corral an extra 1000 engineers into the photo?
It doesn’t bear thinking about.
BV
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: England
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by old,not bold
Just curious; where, when, and - most important - why?
Photographed by Terry Fincher - Copyright © The Fincher Files 2013
Doesn't say why!
https://thefincherfiles.photoshelter...000k4vBZtjHi2Y
Tornados
Yes they required a relatively high maintenance man hours to keep them serviceable. Hardly surprising given when they were being designed and developed.
And of course, Tornado was easily the most advanced and complex fast jet of its age.
But at that time, MMH was not a big issue and in fact was not part of the certification requirements (unlike Typhoon).
The main requirement was mission capability. And in that they performed extremely well over the changing requirements during their life cycle.
And of course, Tornado was easily the most advanced and complex fast jet of its age.
But at that time, MMH was not a big issue and in fact was not part of the certification requirements (unlike Typhoon).
The main requirement was mission capability. And in that they performed extremely well over the changing requirements during their life cycle.
Originally Posted by OldLurker
Caption: Squadron of British Royal Air Force Tornado aircraft and crews seen at RAF Bruggen in Germany in March 1987.
Photographed by Terry Fincher - Copyright © The Fincher Files 2013
Doesn't say why!
https://thefincherfiles.photoshelter...000k4vBZtjHi2Y
Photographed by Terry Fincher - Copyright © The Fincher Files 2013
Doesn't say why!
https://thefincherfiles.photoshelter...000k4vBZtjHi2Y
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Just over the road from Bicester airfield
Age: 79
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obviously someone doesn't have a sense of humour ?
quote:
It never fails to disappoint.
Even when someone posts an old photo, to satisfy the usual reminiscences, the first few comments bring complaints and whinges.
Maybe just say “wow, cool photo!”. If if you can’t bring yourself to say that maybe say nothing at all.
I think we all know the aircrew didn’t fix the jets and tow them out there themselves. I also think we know what you’re getting at with the ground crew comments. Could you imagine though trying to corral an extra 1000 engineers into the photo?
It doesn’t bear thinking about.
unquote.
I thought a simple question having been at the sharp end sorting aircraft out many times for photo ops like this so the Rodney's could have their moments of glory, getting them there moderately easy, getting them away back home not always as easy, maybe the above author has not been up the front to achieve as shown ?
BVj
quote:
It never fails to disappoint.
Even when someone posts an old photo, to satisfy the usual reminiscences, the first few comments bring complaints and whinges.
Maybe just say “wow, cool photo!”. If if you can’t bring yourself to say that maybe say nothing at all.
I think we all know the aircrew didn’t fix the jets and tow them out there themselves. I also think we know what you’re getting at with the ground crew comments. Could you imagine though trying to corral an extra 1000 engineers into the photo?
It doesn’t bear thinking about.
unquote.
I thought a simple question having been at the sharp end sorting aircraft out many times for photo ops like this so the Rodney's could have their moments of glory, getting them there moderately easy, getting them away back home not always as easy, maybe the above author has not been up the front to achieve as shown ?
BVj
Zetec
For a start there would have been half as many aircrew if that picture would have been of my previous aircraft.
As for sense of humour, I guess it’s all subjective.
BV
PS. Since you asked I’m in this photo somewhere. Can’t remember which one.
As for sense of humour, I guess it’s all subjective.
BV
PS. Since you asked I’m in this photo somewhere. Can’t remember which one.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The first town on the Thames
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by MightyGem
Probably a few on here in this photo. Wonder if they are all "S"?
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,708
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
8 Posts
According to a techie friend who was involved with that Bruggen photo, not only were the jets not all serviceable, there were some down the back that didn't even have a full complement of engines or panels!
As for the lack of groundcrew representation in group photos, as a junior pilot I was once tasked to corral the sqn aircrew for a photo and went to Rects Control to arrange a suitable backdrop. A smartarse corporal made the 'what about the techies who fix 'em then sir?' comment, probably expecting a chuckle from the chief; what he got was the chief pointing to the engineers' group photos behind Rects with a sharp "There's no aircrew who fly 'em in those, now bugger off". Couldn't have put it better!
As for the lack of groundcrew representation in group photos, as a junior pilot I was once tasked to corral the sqn aircrew for a photo and went to Rects Control to arrange a suitable backdrop. A smartarse corporal made the 'what about the techies who fix 'em then sir?' comment, probably expecting a chuckle from the chief; what he got was the chief pointing to the engineers' group photos behind Rects with a sharp "There's no aircrew who fly 'em in those, now bugger off". Couldn't have put it better!
Back in the days before BV was BV,we had lots of groundcrew, men who wore long shorts,or even short longs,to care for our war-weary windswept Whirlwind at the Far end of Empire........
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Boulevard of Broken Dreams
Age: 51
Posts: 194
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the original picture, the Station Commander was (IIRC) Group Captain (or possibly Air Commodore?) John Houghton.
Not long after that pic was published I was lucky enough to get an ATC camp place at RAF Bruggen in Jul 87 and the Staish attended our BBQ evening. Spent the week assisting 17 Sqn in recovering the Tonkas back into the HAS - exciting stuff for a 15 year old! One clear memory is the mainwheels of the Tonkas after landing seemed hotter than the sun!
Not long after that pic was published I was lucky enough to get an ATC camp place at RAF Bruggen in Jul 87 and the Staish attended our BBQ evening. Spent the week assisting 17 Sqn in recovering the Tonkas back into the HAS - exciting stuff for a 15 year old! One clear memory is the mainwheels of the Tonkas after landing seemed hotter than the sun!
