Military Forum?
 

"A forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here."

Perhaps it is just my weak grasp of the English language, but where exactly in that statement does it suggest that Journos/spotters are welcome?






Now I think about it, Adminers are stretching the point.

And Rockapes

Some might include ATC

http://bestsmileys.com/angles/3.gif

It's CRM and all that crap innit . . . ..

Even adminers have a part to play in flight safety.

Shiney messes up pilots pay (again) -> pilot gets into plane still thinking about how hes going to be able to afford the down payments on his vintage British sports car -> pilot still too busy thinking about money etc as he flies into side of mountain.

I'll give you rocks though and raise you plods.;)

Tourist,

If you do a search for 'Aircrew up his own Ar$e' you will probably be able to find other threads on this very subject!

Oh for goodness sake, the diversity on this board is half its appeal. I am (no longer) military, nor aircrew, and don't hide the fact.

And there is nothing wrong with rocks. Plods, well OK, depends........

Stacker, that was a FS film back in the 1970s with a young Richard O'Sullivan trashing a Harrier......

Threads like this make me wonder why I am still in after 30 years. Yes we are here to support the 'aircrew', but hey, without us you are stuffed, yes you can fly into wherever, some of the time, you can probably fix some of your snags some of the time, but to do the job properly you ARE part of a team, if you don't like it P*** off.

Maple 01

That was from the 1970s? Bl**dy hell I'm getting old!

Det 1 without "aircrew" your jobs would cease to exist;)

as nice as it is to have a wide variety of people on this forums, it would be nice at times to restrict responses to aircrew. there is often a lot of input on these pages from people who really dont know what they are talking about when it comes to aviation. im only really interested in topics relating to flying and would kind of prefer if they werent taken over by blunts. i respect their knowledge and realise the part they play in keeping us flying which is why when i have a question outside of flying i will go to the expert in that field. i just think that the stackers/cops/admin types need to stick to what they know.

Agreed, but the original thread did cast a fairly wide net. Suffice to say that the relationship between aircrew and blunts is symbiotic.

Blimey, where'd the fun be if everyone stuck to what they knew?

CG

DET1, what branch are you, and does it meet the criteria?

"A forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here."


If so, then fine. Its Danny's trainset.
If not then its you that should p1ss off

Fortunately, Tourist, you don't have a say in who is allowed to post here. The mix currently represented allows a broad and vigorous discussion about all matters to do with military aviation - and not just British military. As this is one of the most active, most informative and most entertaining fora on PPRuNe, we will leave it exactly as it is - including extending a welcome to all those who have a valid point to make about military aviation, whether they be aviators or not.

Let's face it, we are all (or mostly) tax-payers; they're our toys you're playing with!

Scroggs

And many of the journos have 'got some in' before they went over to the dark side. Mick Smith was in the Army, I believe, and some of the specialist lads have PPLs, etc. a few of us even having been taught to fly on UASs.

What a short sighted statement !!!! I wonder how you'll feel when the "playstation generation" are busy operating UAVs from the safety of blighty via a big computer screen. The air force will still need techies to fix, suppliers to source and intel from the int branch, in fact it will just be the "aircrew" who would be surplus to requirements.:{ :{

And if it means less people like you that can only be a good thing (IMHO)

Well scroggs, why not change the tag line to

"A forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here plus we would specifically like to welcome backstabbing journos and the opinions of any twonk who was in the cadets once and held a real BB gun once, honest"

Obviously Jacko is exempt because he touched a Bulldog once:rolleyes:

I know it was mentioned / discussed before, but the idea of a closed thread to me sounded good.

I do agree with the "But I'm ex mil, and want to contribute" and all the more better for it, but others have closed forums such as BA and Virgin. Why those organisations and not us ?

Not that I really care though. Just stirring things up :E

As a controller in the TVAA for a Civilian company, who i hasten to add gets military aircraft by the bucket loads - Vortex', Shawbury, Iceberg, ArmyAir, Navy, etc etc trying to fly through the helilanes (and not always doing a very good job of Navving), i feel we all have an equal part in the industry, and thus exchanging points of view on forums. It takes more than one point of view to make a discussion, otherwise its just butt-kissing.
If you feel that civvies should be excluded from mil areas, then we'll stop all military in civil control zones....

Tourist, I have looked back through your thread contributions. You seem to be either a long serving arrogant 'superior' aircraft crewman, or else a long serving arrogant fool. Does anyone else have an opinion? Look forward to Tourists reply, preferably in the terms one would expect of an Officer and a Gentleman. :ok:

Tourist

I've got a lot of sympathy for you on this one. I am not aircrew, but I do think as an engineer I fill the published requirements. I think that there are many trades/specialisations which don't obviously fit the criteria though. Shineys, stackers, plods, rocks, fitters and turners, etc would all fit that list. But, and a big but, many of them do bring things to the discussion which we are probably too blinkered to see. We are all guilty of making the odd ill considered post, (excepting BEagle of course, who is never wrong), but I think the balance is generally okay, and most people try not to post where they know bugger all. There are exceptions of course, and they stand out like a dogs nads.

S_H