When is an Airman not an Aviator? When he’s a retired officer of course!
Thread Starter
When is an Airman not an Aviator? When he’s a retired officer of course!
Well today’s RAF story muddies the water even further. Here we have a story of an old intrepid ‘aviator’, in the real meaning of the word, being designated an ‘airman’, outside of the original RAF definition, when the chap is an officer. Can the RAF’s messaging get any more confusing??
https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles...felong-friend/
https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles...felong-friend/
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,117
Received 2,959 Likes
on
1,263 Posts
Funny I always thought they, as I did, became a Mr, Mrs, MIss, none of the "Airman" garbage.
Personally my damn I don't give a dear, other than to top up with some more popcorn for the event. Oh, and well done Jack and your dear friend Stuart for carrying out that survey in the forties. I hope that you have passed on the details to your nearest and dearest for posterity. It would be tragic if this badly written MOD account was the only record of such a daring adventure.
Good spot LJ! Give us back our language!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Where the heart belongs
Age: 55
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Well today’s RAF story muddies the water even further. Here we have a story of an old intrepid ‘aviator’, in the real meaning of the word, being designated an ‘airman’, outside of the original RAF definition, when the chap is an officer. Can the RAF’s messaging get any more confusing??
https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles...felong-friend/
https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles...felong-friend/
“Flt Lt PCD, under QR???? you are ordered to go and {do something you don’t want to do}”
“Sir, that QR refers to ‘airmen’ not ‘officers’ “
”In this context it means everyone”
”Unlike other QRs where there is a difference?”
”Just go and do it…”
Gentleman Aviator
Surely an airman (no capital letter) is a wide-ranging generic description, contrasting with soldier or sailor.
I believe it would be correct to say: the Duke of Wellington was a soldier, Nelson was a sailor, and Guy Gibson was an airman.
Seems pretty straightforward to me ............
I believe it would be correct to say: the Duke of Wellington was a soldier, Nelson was a sailor, and Guy Gibson was an airman.
Seems pretty straightforward to me ............
Surely an airman (no capital letter) is a wide-ranging generic description, contrasting with soldier or sailor.
I believe it would be correct to say: the Duke of Wellington was a soldier, Nelson was a sailor, and Guy Gibson was an airman.
Seems pretty straightforward to me ............
I believe it would be correct to say: the Duke of Wellington was a soldier, Nelson was a sailor, and Guy Gibson was an airman.
Seems pretty straightforward to me ............
The story is not whether someone is an Airman or an airman or anything else but what an incredible life Jack and Stuart have undoubtedly led and what a marvellous time Jack still seems to be having.
I've just bought a copy of Stuart's book Hope Has Wings.
I've just bought a copy of Stuart's book Hope Has Wings.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
and the airman who looked after your airframe was Mortice, except the rank then was rigger.
Surely an airman (no capital letter) is a wide-ranging generic description, contrasting with soldier or sailor.
I believe it would be correct to say: the Duke of Wellington was a soldier, Nelson was a sailor, and Guy Gibson was an airman.
Seems pretty straightforward to me ............
I believe it would be correct to say: the Duke of Wellington was a soldier, Nelson was a sailor, and Guy Gibson was an airman.
Seems pretty straightforward to me ............
The shockingly poor English and lack of proof reading in the article is typical of most writing these days, but deeply disappointing in the RAF’s own website.
A great account of two courageous men. I remember a fellow C130 colleague, Wg Cdr Mike Black, left the force in the '90s to go and fly with MAF. In those days it was the Missionary Aviation Fellowship as they supplied missionaries in Africa. I guess they have rebranded to escape what might be regarded as an awkward colonial label. Nothing to apologise about in my book; they did a great work which has left an enduring legacy of schools and hospitals conveying a message of love, peace and hope.
We could do with having the MAF in many other parts of the world today!
We could do with having the MAF in many other parts of the world today!
We could do with having the MAF in many other parts of the world today