Stripped out because it was having a C check.

I've got some leftist neighbours who - ably supported by the BBC - keep going on about the supposed cost of this project; due to social distancing and warm weather this 'going on' is, of course, being broadcast at an unusually increased volume, just to ensure that other neighbours get the benefit of their 'insight' and 'superior intellect'. Therefore, can someone here who is really 'in the the know' furnish the definitive FACTS wrt:

a. Was the airframe in for a scheduled maintaintence check ('C', 'D' or otherwise - would be nice to know!), that would have included a re-paint?

b. That the maintenance check would have been included in the Airtanker contract? ie, the cost of the check did not increase the cost to the taxpayer, other than, perhaps, the fee for the design.

c. Confirmation that the Airtanker PFI contract was concluded under Gordon Brown's tenure as Treasurer and/or PM?

Purely in the interests of balance and accuracy of course! :E

On balance it looks ok to me. (Not sure about the gold lettering though) 🇬🇧🇬🇧

Doing AAR here the first day after getting back - obvious PR !

Looks actually quite good...

That'd be a great way to arrive at some World Conference - and would be a lot more impressive than Trump's 747!

It'll never happen though, I guess.....

BoJo did not like the grey colour and decided to change it by spending a lot of money during the economic meltdown era. Not sure if this counts as 'leftist propoganda".

Trump will never fly in the new AF1. Them’s the rules.

I thought the convention was that any aircraft of the USAF POTUS flew in was Air Force One, similarly any aircraft of the USMC was Marine One

Indeed, and some of us may even remember GROVE and DEEPDENE for the Royal Train. 😇

he will if invited by the then President. I'm sure Mrs Obama will be very graceful about inviting Mr Trump onboard.............. :ok:

correct - but people tend to look at the BIG beast

Well, I've gnawed on the design for a couple days -- without swallowing of course -- and at best I'm ambivalent; disappointed if I'm honest -- which is likely indicative of little considering I'm rarely asked over for parties anymore.

Perhaps it's my middle England protestant heritage, or perhaps it's apropos of nothing, but I find the scheme flippant, over the top and clichė.

Give me understated elegance with subtle hints of tradition any day and spare me the focus-grouped, hyperactive marketing codswallop. There is nothing in this design really, that separates it in any meaningful way from all the other red white and blue national billboards wasting fuel carrying self-inflating jackasses hither and yon. Oh, and it doubles as a gas station. Yawn.

My guess is it will be indiscernible from the irresistible trump farce un, except it'll be smaller yet too big.

\rant

When the aircraft goes on trip with PM aboard there will also be numerous members of staff plus press so will be pretty full

Only those who get past Cummings. He's Ring Master of this particular circus after all.

Any truth to the rumour that a Brexit campaign connection of his was awarded the contract for the new design?

Just a quick question... Where are the in flight refuelling fuel tanks..? Under the floor the whole length of the aircraft ..?

There are no 'refuelling tanks'. The normal A330 fuel system is used.

I'm pleased to see that the F35 Force AAR techniques have improved since they started at Beaufort NC. Still some "stabbing in the dark".

By comparison the Typhoon pilot shows how to do it!

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....23480b9fce.jpg


And a simple paint job tweak to make it ready for its primary intended purpose.

I guess a bean counter somewhere will be sweating about the lost revenue for passenger ops over the next 3 years due to Covid.

I hold most politicians in equal contempt, whatever the hue of their 'Party'. However, I do support the concept of freedom of speech, truth and accountability (old, misbegotten, concepts, I know) and was simply enquiring as to the veracity of the 'leftist propogander' (your phrase, not mine) being espoused on various media outlets. If your statement is true, then all the opprobrium being heaped upon those responsible is entirely justified and has my full support. However, the indications on here - being a blog-site with some credentials with respect to matters aviation - seem to favour the counter view; I was simply trying to establish the facts of the matter with some authoritative evidence.

Not sure if it has escaped notice but the Government are spending billions trying to prop up the economy during an economic meltdown. Not going ahead with the planned check may have led to the MRO closing and even more people losing their jobs.

But at least the Guardian would have been happy...

Nice footage filmed at Cambridge. See from 2:58 where something appears to come off from the port side near the tail. Possibly masking tape?

Certainly does, TEEEJ. I wondered initially about a bit of wind-blown FOD, but that’s certainly come off the airframe.

Cleaning rag or masking paper possibly? It came off the aircraft doesn't appear to be picked up off the ground

Just seen the beast on the pan at Brize, looking a little incongruous alongside its counterparts. The livery is a bit too bright for my liking, much better to have gone for a lower key, more classic design IMO. Looks like a LoCo/BA knock-off.

Dead Pan
Not much more to say than that , I concur. Pretty poor for a country which promotes its creative skills companies "as being some of the best in the world".
Cheers
Mr Mac

I have yet to see any official reference to the aircraft having undergone a scheduled maintenance check while at Cambridge. The MoD press release simply referred to the "conclusion of the refurbishment" initiated by the 2015 Strategic Defence Review, whereby the aircraft would be configured to carry senior ministers and the Royal Family. Obviously the interior refurbishment was completed some time ago - the aircraft has been carrying government ministers since 2016 and operating royal flights since (I think) 2017 - though I guess it might now be sporting a few new cushion covers ...

See above. While the original PFI contract in 2008 would presumably have made provision for scheduled maintenance, and may well have covered periodic repainting of the aircraft, I doubt that anyone at the time foresaw or costed a requirement, 12 years later, to design and apply a Presidential scheme to the aircraft. That's what the £900,000 bill was for - the additional cost of not simply applying another coat of grey. :O

ZZ336 up on QRA this morning.

Landed at a secret Oxfordshire base at about 1058A. Interesting to see that FlightRadar24 has an up-to-date picture of it in all its red-white-and-blue-ness

airsound

Great way and good timing to make the point that it is an operational tanker just like the rest.

Or more likely a cynical publicity stunt to counter the adverse publicity-be interesting to see how often the aircraft is flown in the AAR role-not holding my breath!

SF

Well, why don't come back in a couple of months and check out the number of AAR (or other "normal" tasking) flights it has, or hasn't, done? Not holding my breath!

To answer your question by someone that knows, it’s flown in the AAR role a lot.

Indeed, and I recall seeing pictures of it on a North Sea towline the day after it arrived back at Brize from Marshalls. As it's an aircraft in the core fleet, ought we not to expect it to fly its share of daily tasking as the engineers manage the fleet as a whole? And as to publicity stunts, the main media fuss has passed on with the only sustained interest being shown here.

I never expected this thread to last as long as it has, and now perhaps it has run its course!

The RAF sadly do not have a fleet size that would allow them to leave any one of their aircraft on the ground because it is painted differently. You can be assured it will be flown as normal when not required on VIP tasks.

The rest of the ill informed guff spouted on the rest of this thread is an example of why i rarely post now. What happened to the days when the Mods removed posts that clearly had nothing to do with Military Aviation? This thread for a start would be at best 5 pages long.

Well, at least the Mods deleted the wholly inappropriate post submitted by Brakedwell a few days ago.

Easy - advertising! The more posts, the more clicks and the more the board owners can charge for all the adverts that infest PPRuNe and slow page loading on legacy browsers...

Or am I wrong?

TT - keeping well, I trust?

Beagle, you have a PM

Bit more aviation content than a bloody BBQ !