Let's try again....


https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....f6ba41587c.jpg

It differs on both sides and is based on the flag hanging on a pole at the front so is correct, the Union Jack when on an aircraft is similar, on the right side looking at it, it appear to be in reverse, ie thick white band top right as opposed to the normal top left corner, but is correct as seen on a forward flag pole... if that makes sense. The one on the current Royal helicopter is wrong.... cringe, but that’s just laziness and piss poor management.

No, the poster's comment on the French President's A330 was referring to the fact that it doesn't observe the flagpole convention. The Tricolore on both sides of the aircraft is painted with the blue on the left, instead of one side being the usual mirror image of the other.

I don't suppose it will be nice and subtle like the Czech A319 below. I am expecting a union flag fin like Hawk T1s XX172 and XX238 had in the mid/late '80s(?):8. Boris might like the 2010 4FTS 50th anniversary scheme :eek:.

In similar vein to Davef68, every time I go to LFPG the VIP aircraft remind me I live in a country where policy is often driven by envy - why one of the top ten economies in the world can't justify it is beyond me. :ugh:

What they should have done originally was lease one of the surge aircraft.

Can a tanker professional enlighten me on the reasoning for using a KC3 as opposed to a KC2? Low demand for the centre hose?

On the grey front I believe the Belgian VVIP leased A321 is also grey.

I am impressed that no Marshalls' employee has been disgruntled enough to leak the scheme.


https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....19a9347752.jpg
This file is licensed by Pedro Aragão under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.

Whoever at Marshalls got the government to spend £900k on a repaint is hopefully getting a big bonus. It is probably 6-7x more than if should be costing hence why I’m not convinced that it’s the full story. If they’re throwing in a C check in to, it is probably justified but that is an obscene amount of money if it isn’t.

Dave..

Gotcha, I never noticed that (on iPad ), I was looking at the fin, correct, it’s wrong like Bettys chopper.

And not even a widebody, at that. Have they no shame ?

Well spotted, Sycamore! I've just checked that the French flag on the port side is shown correctly in terms of the aircraft's forward motion, but it would sadly appear that no one was greatly concerned about the flag looking aesthetically correct on the starboard side.

In the same vein, on arrival in Deauvile on one of many forays across the Channel, I discovered that we had regrettably not brought our French courtesy flag, so we hoisted Flag Tango at the crosstrees instead - and no one else noticed the reversal of colours for the next ten days.......😱

Jack

Grateful for confirmation which one you think is the present NZ Prime Minister.....😁

Jack

Grey paintwork would have suited PM John Major...

Commercial repainting of a330 including strip and paint for simple to medium detailed livery (no Disney, no pokemons, no shine with multiple layers) is 200-250k USD. Design is 25-50k max but lots of outfits would design it for free in exchange to right to refer it publicly. Where 900k GBP is coming from?

It's a 'dead cat', isn't it?

If it wasn't costing this much or the stated cost included other items, then HMG could have announced that. They haven't. Whether or not the story is accurate, this forum alone demonstrates that it will get some talking about 'Boris-bashers' and 'Remoaners' and others clearly taking an opposite view...whilst more important matters get side-lined.

If foreign governments and potential investors (the latter tending to be hard-headed) are impressed by a flashy colour-scheme and flock to do business with us on the back of it, then I couldn't help but be delighted. If not, then we'll have to export a lot more boomerangs to Australia to get the money back...and Voyager is little use for getting them there.

Maybe the £900K figure is coming from the, 'I/we have an agenda...' section of the media (don't they all though?), or, the £900K is correct, but, it also involves additional/necessary work which has been conveniently left out of the equation?

-RP

I could understand the price if it was also having a check, secure comms, defence fit, avionics suite update or the like.

I believe this is photo shopped.....It is going to be delivered in September

Yes, it's photoshopped, but the real thing is now flying in those colours:

https://www.theweek.in/news/india/20...ooks-like.html

It’s a great theory, and it’s exactly what was done when the VC10 VIP role disappeared and 32 Sqn lost most of its assets.

A few years later a National Audit Office Report stated that more was being spent leasing aircraft from the likes of BA than it would cost to own and run the aircraft. This was the origins of Blair Force One, much as I hate to defend Blair, when on the back of this he proposed to purchase VIP aircraft again. This was abandoned following exactly the same type of press hysteria as is now appearing over this paint scheme.

‘According to an RAF source’ it will be ‘diplomatic and appropriate’ - I’m quite looking forward to a variation of the old VC10 scheme personally.

It will be interesting to discover if this quasi-military aircraft carries the RAF roundel, or is presented as a civilian airframe.

Maybe a nonagenarian could raise the money?

Well, I really don't understand all this whingeing....

A Voyager painted appropriately in national colours will be worthy VIP aircraft, although ideally there should be 2 as turning up in a grey jet would reflect badly - the DM journos would claim that "The RAF can't even manage to keep one aeroplane serviceable"...

As for the scheme, the very last thing I would wish to see would be some throwback to old Trucky Command Comet / VC10 schemes of the '60s. That would just promote an image of the UK being stuck in the past!

I hope that HM was asked for Her approval of the final design?

became very
 

BV # 61
The colour of large aircraft can be operationally important. The two Tristar K1 aircraft used in Op Granby were originally in the standard white livery flying towlines at 25,000ft not too far from the Iraqi border. They were visible from many miles away, unlike the VC10s in Hemp. When given a coat of pink paint (to become known as Pinky and Perky) they became very difficult to see, for which the crews were very grateful. Also on the ground at Riyadh, along with 100 odd large aircraft in grey or Hemp they were the most obviously visible.

Lost in the Tundra # 93
Most civilian airliners do not have Self Defence capabilities, unlike operational aircraft, or the secure comms required. It would cost a lot of money to have them fitted and authorised for each flight.

If I wanted some cosmetic work on my car - alloys tidying up, few scratches sorting, T cutting etc I’d probably do a bit of internet searching which would give figures, say £100-200. If I went to my normal dealer (called, eg Martials of Oxford) and they quoted £900 I might think of going elsewhere or saying ‘don’t be ridiculous, you’re having a laugh’.

Paint the thing by all means, make it look good, but pay a reasonable price.

I see the Daily Mail has come upwith this:


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....5b685ae182.jpg

Indeed, Tengah Type ! When the Pink Pigs turned up at KKIA, I compared the f. stop at 1/500th with a normal white TriStar. It was a whole stop - which IIRC meant that the pink ones reflected half the light of the white aircraft.

During ULAS times, one of our last student syllabus exercises was low level manoeuvring. If Brize was quiet, I would ask to route on the 'Charlie Delta' back to Abingdon via Brize at LL - which was usually OK'd. As we approached, I'd ask the student to count how many VC10s he/she could spot. They usually saw the trucky ones, but rarely the hemp tankers until I pointed them out. This was to show them that even at a sedate 120KIAS / 250 ft visual target acquisition was much more difficult if the target was camouflaged.

However, as BV infers, acquiring the target with the Mk1 eyeball is now a thing of the past - so probably less need for tone down paint schemes these days.

Found a Union Flag liveried aircraft after a brief search . . . . plenty of these sat around, currently. . . .

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....33a9f5d250.jpg

The BA heritage liveries that have been used in the last year or so have been extremely popular, so that might not necessarily be the case.

We've got a national image of being a bit quaint and retro, why not lean into it?

I gather there have been discussions with Norwegian to repaint the entire fleet of Voyagers and put the face of a different minister on each tail. This will be a cost saving on the Boris plane as much will be white, but Hancock is asking for his to also have the NHS rainbow.

Tengah
 

I’m not debating that colour can affect visual acquisition. I’m merely postulating that pretty much everyone has a radar (and other sensors) now. Remember Granby was 30 years ago. Not everyone was radar equipped then.

Anyway, I’m only partially serious and the benefits of easy peacetime visual acquisition are probably still outweighed by the benefits of camouflage. However, the scales are tipping.

BV

I would expect that the person running the UK government Mr. D. Cummings will have submitted a design?

But he won't be paying for it!

More ides
 

Heres a couple more suggestions to mull over.

How about a half and half paint scheme, port side colourful as required for 'showing off' and photo ops, then you ensure you always park with that side towards the cameras. Then the starboard side in camouflage. Then in a hostile environment you always keep the starboard side to the enemy.....

or

there are now plenty of flexible plastic displays being developed. You could coat the entire aircraft in these and change the paint scheme at the click of a mouse. Then it could be rented out or you could sell advertising space on it. You could even have adaptive camouflage for example displaying the ground below on the upper wings and the plane would practically vanish..

Nah, still too boring and understated for my liking. How about we paint Churchill on one side of the fin and Victoria on the other?

How about Cecil Rhodes on either side of the fin.

If thats a Go'er, get Jet2 to paint it. Betcha it'll be a quarter/third the cost.🤔

Can anyone clarify wether it’s
A) already painted in TC colours
B) it needed a repaint anyway

This has a big orientation on arguments wether it’s a waste of money or not.

Sadly also a photo shop as called out on Twitter a few days later.

Someone has already come up with something on similar lines here.......:E

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....c5fe3842cf.jpg

For (A) see my earlier post #87, its nothing to do with the ex TC jet.
As to (B) the condition of the current grey, based on the age and other jets suggests it 'probably' wasn't in need of an immediate repaint.

Thanks for clearing that up. My last two questions then:

C) How much is actually being repainted? Is it just a tail fin as I’ve heard some suggestions or is it a complete aircraft repaint in bright red as some papers have suggested.

D) What is the likely extra cost to its planned maintenance to add this extra paint livery?

Then the old VC10 scheme would be the best option, flat the top half down and spray it white, add a cheat line, the wings and all things down would remain as per before.