RAF100

Re: RAF100

Postby jasonT1981 on Fri 25 May 2018, 5:20 pm

Berf wrote:Strange to mention England, Wales and NI on this page https://www.RAF.mod.uk/display-teams/chinook-display-team/displays/ only highlights the fact that in the 100th year the team is not going to Scotland.


3 big airshows that weekend, Scotland, Portrush and Bournemouth. I would have thought a day at each like the Reds are doing, not all 3 days in same place given the first two are RAF 100 events. I will see it twice though this summer.
User avatar
jasonT1981

Re: RAF100

Postby disgruntled on Sat 26 May 2018, 9:02 am

How many times does it need saying? The RAF100 logo was designed and implemented by civil servants NOT the RAF. It was decided that there needed to be a single fixed corporate image that could be used on everything from letterheads to digital media to... yes aircraft. This why can’t we have this scheme or that scheme because they’ve done it before is completely childish. The COs have been told what must happen and that they need to present a uniformed corporate image of the event regardless of anything they may have wanted to do.
Stop acting like spoilt brats and get off the RAF’s back. If you must blame anyone blame the damn civvies that erode any sense of service ethos and pride in an attempt to prove their own self importance, limit the influence of the Forces oh and save a few pounds from an over stretched defence budget.
Oh and whilst I’m at it - give it a rest about the damn garden. It was mostly funded by donations with an element of funding from the RAF100 budget. And yes it did get a gold medal. And yes it was featured heavily in several TV programmes so from a marketing/awareness/visibility point of view it was a huge success and probably did at least as much if not more in terms of the objectives of RAF100, which if you hadn’t noticed is far wider reaching than providing a couple of pretty airframes for a relatively small number of bratish self indulgent spotters.
disgruntled

Re: RAF100

Postby Tommy on Sat 26 May 2018, 9:51 am

It doesn't "need" saying at all. But you can keep saying it all you like. I'm repeating a response I've already made to you which you've already said you agree with. But if you keep saying it, I'll keep saying it back.

It doesn't matter whether it really is the civil servants or not (and we don't know. The decision making process for this will be hidden and buried behind countless meeting minutes and corporate bureaucracy). This is the RAF's celebration. They're the ones doing the showing off, it's their celebration, and they're the ones in receipt of the feedback whether that's good or bad. I've also already stated that I'm sure that a great many in the RAF are ashamed and embarrassed at these weird logos on their jets. No-one is singling out hard-working RAF personnel. Obviously these decisions are made far and above what personnel probably had in mind. But again, regardless of who made (or forced) the decision, it's the RAF's event, not Whitehall's.

I reiterate, I'd bet money that if the RAF were pulling a blinder in these celebrations (there are some things I think are done quite well, tbf), that you would not be saying "no, guys, none of this is the RAF - you must direct your praise to the faceless civil servants in Whitehall" No-one said "guys, let's congratulate the civil servants who allowed this to happen" when the Battle of Britain Typhoon rolled out of the paint shop three years ago.

It's not "bratish enthusiasts" wanting a pretty jet to look at. At least not in whole. It's a catastrophic failure of message. You know the corporate strapline. Explain to me how these weird ill-fitting corporate-logo adorned machines do that, because try as I might I fail completely to understand in that regard.

And again, it completely fails to deal with the point that we've seen some outstanding "special" schemes from the RAF in years where no specific budget has been allocated to them to celebrate. We've seen several squadron centenary tails/colours/badges on a lot of different airframes from A400s to Typhoons and most in between, a D-Day Typhoon, two specially-marked "display" Typhoons, a Battle of Britain Typhoon, an Op Granby Tornado, a desert-colour Tucano, a Battle of Britain Tucano, poppy-adorned King Airs, the list extends and extends. All without, to my knowledge, civil servants mandating a "squadron celebration procedure" so that each squadron celebrated their birthday in the same fashion, style, or colours.

All at a time where no specific budget was allocated. And they were, for the most part, pretty decent. Two things stand out to me when looking back on those, it was the RAF praised when each was "uncovered", not the MoD, as I've said. The second is the real sticking point - we know that the RAF can do better.

But through all of this, the last time I laid it out in response to the "it's not the RAF's fault" rhetoric, you agreed with most of what I said. But stood by your position without really explaining how you could do that.

So, I guess, you can keep saying it. And you can keep calling us brats, but people (not just I) have already responded on the points you've raised. If you remain utterly unconvinced by whatever anyone else says, I'm unsure why you feel that anyone will be convinced by what you say, regardless of how many times you repeat it.

P.s. - per your request, I've managed to write all of that without referencing the "damn garden". I hope that suffices.
User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff

Re: RAF100

Postby disgruntled on Sat 26 May 2018, 10:34 am

Thanks Tommy for your reply and I’ll happily debate.

We do now know it was civil servants that designed and mandated the design as per the response to the FOI request that someone posted on here. Sorry I can’t find it at the moment to quote but it is here.

On the subject of the other schemes that have been designed and showpieced I thought I had alluded to that but my apologies if it wasn’t clear. I suspect, although admittedly have no proof, that these special schemes were able to be put in place as it was a decision for the individual COs, although of course with approval from HQ. I would also imagine that the schemes were paid for through sponsorship or possibly through grants from service charities (yes they do make grants for this type of thing as it comes under the banner of morale and efficiency)
These designs were able to be imaginative and different as there was not a single corporate message that needed to be got out. This is a crucial difference. A squadron celebrating their anniversary by having own of their aircraft in a special scheme is far easier and justifiable than having a mishmash of schemes with different messages when it is all about a while force message of celebration.

It’s tiresome to read so many negative comments about UKAF but particularly the RAF in terms of their display assests. How many times do we read on here that the Typhoon display is rubbish or the derogatory way many on here view the RAFAT. I sometimes wonder what people are watching when they roundly criticise a display which is always flown in an exemplary manner and where almost all of the action and changes of formation are flown as part of the display. But no all we hear is “it’s the same old same old” “the commentary is tired” or “they’re not a patch on Frecce or PdeF”. Meandering off topic here I realise... apologies.

So there’s my hopefully balanced, and to the best of my knowledge, informed response.

One more point if I may. Whilst I am serving I am by no stretch a crabfat or thank God a rock ape. My service is altogether more senior, although albeit far smarter than any matelot....
disgruntled

Re: RAF100

Postby FullCarrot on Sat 26 May 2018, 10:41 am

So with the government continually squeezing the MOD budgets and in turn the station budgets, people are surprised all we’ve got to show for it is a sticker. I’m not surprised that’s all we’ve got, the government has made it clear that the military, amongst other things, is something to continually remove funding from, the likelihood of them splashing the cash so that the RAF can celebrate in the manner they’d like is remote.
I would find it hard to believe that anyone that serves in the RAF is pleased about their big year being marked in such a manner, unfortunately even Station Commanders and indeed the AOC have their lords and masters.
Benson have managed to turn out a tiger striped puma and I can only assume this has been possible because the station budget allowed for it.
No we aren’t getting the specially painted aircraft we’d hope to see, I dare say the corporate sticker has cost the tax payer millions (money well spent eh?), but efforts are in place to have airframes in the air en masse for an Airshow and that is going to cost a pretty penny.

The great efforts we have seen previously from anniversary aircraft means that at the right time the budget was there to make it happen at a station level and it obviously did, so there’s an example of the RAF’s attitude towards anniversaries, what we are seeing here for RAF 100 is a government attitude towards them.

Incidentally, the Navy don’t get specially painted warships and the army don’t get specially painted tanks to celebrate their anniversaries.....

One further thing I’d like to address seeing some of the comments here with regards to ”pride”, the RAF is the men and women that choose to serve in its ranks, nothing more, nothing less. Men and women who wouldn’t have been involved in the decision making process for RAF 100.
I’m proud of the RAF, I’m not proud of the governments appalling attitude towards it.
FullCarrot

Re: RAF100

Postby Spiny Norman on Sat 26 May 2018, 10:58 am

It seems that more could have been done. If the total budget for RAF100 is £7.7m, compare that to the £32m of the recent royal wedding.

You could argue that although it looked a lovely occasion, without the RAF's role in UK history the royal family would be speaking German.
I want to see a flying Mosquito in the UK. I'm supporting The People's Mosquito.
http://www.peoplesmosquito.org.uk/
User avatar
Spiny Norman

Re: RAF100

Postby toom317 on Sat 26 May 2018, 11:04 am

jasonT1981 wrote:
Berf wrote:Strange to mention England, Wales and NI on this page https://www.RAF.mod.uk/display-teams/chinook-display-team/displays/ only highlights the fact that in the 100th year the team is not going to Scotland.


3 big airshows that weekend, Scotland, Portrush and Bournemouth. I would have thought a day at each like the Reds are doing, not all 3 days in same place given the first two are RAF 100 events. I will see it twice though this summer.


It would appear that at least one type of each aircraft type is to get this logo. With the Typhoon at Coningsby having it, that leaves not a single aircraft based in Scotland having it.
"Nice pics mate" comments only! No criticism please.

Equipment: Camera, Lens, Goretex Y fronts.
User avatar
toom317
UKAR Supporter

Re: RAF100

Postby Unknown74 on Sat 26 May 2018, 11:25 am

On the subject of Special Schemes I notice 2 Hawks in special schemes haven't been mentioned, 2008's 19 Sqdn Camouflage scheme and 100 Sqdn's Lancaster type scheme from 2012.
Unknown74

Re: RAF100

Postby disgruntled on Sat 26 May 2018, 11:43 am

Or Norman you could argue that a large percentage of that £32 million was recouped in tourism income...
disgruntled

Re: RAF100

Postby Spiny Norman on Sat 26 May 2018, 4:41 pm

disgruntled wrote:Or Norman you could argue that a large percentage of that £32 million was recouped in tourism income...


You could argue that Paris does alright and they've not had a royal wedding, christening or Bar Mitzvah since the 1700s.
I want to see a flying Mosquito in the UK. I'm supporting The People's Mosquito.
http://www.peoplesmosquito.org.uk/
User avatar
Spiny Norman

Re: RAF100

Postby capercaillie on Tue 29 May 2018, 11:07 am

toom317 wrote:It would appear that at least one type of each aircraft type is to get this logo. With the Typhoon at Coningsby having it, that leaves not a single aircraft based in Scotland having it.



Can't tell if you're really disappointed or very relieved?
"The surrogate voice of st24"
User avatar
capercaillie

Re: RAF100

Postby CJS on Tue 29 May 2018, 11:12 am

The latter, surely?
"Forewarned is forearmed"
How do you know I didn't?
User avatar
CJS

Re: RAF100

Postby ericbee123 on Tue 29 May 2018, 1:07 pm

Just had the RAF100 A400M doing circuits of my garden.

Looked OK to me, but then again I’ve already said I like it. :)
Disclaimer-I have spell/grammar checked this post, it may still contain mistakes that might cause offence.
User avatar
ericbee123

Re: RAF100

Postby zigzag on Tue 29 May 2018, 1:21 pm

You must have a big garden :biggrin:
If you like these pics there are more utterly brilliant shots at https://www.flickr.com/photos/131094099@N08/albums
#MOT
User avatar
zigzag

Re: RAF100

Postby chrisward123 on Tue 29 May 2018, 1:30 pm

ericbee123 wrote:Just had the RAF100 A400M doing circuits of my garden.

Looked OK to me, but then again I’ve already said I like it. :)


I'm located next to Blackpool Airport and I also saw ZM416 doing several nice circuits and I agree with Eric it looks 'ok ish' on the A400m.
2018 - RIAT, Blackpool & Southport
User avatar
chrisward123

Re: RAF100

Postby ericbee123 on Tue 29 May 2018, 2:05 pm

chrisward123 wrote:
ericbee123 wrote:Just had the RAF100 A400M doing circuits of my garden.

Looked OK to me, but then again I’ve already said I like it. :)


I'm located next to Blackpool Airport and I also saw ZM416 doing several nice circuits and I agree with Eric it looks 'ok ish' on the A400m.


Was a good afternoon with that and the Tucanos in between.
Disclaimer-I have spell/grammar checked this post, it may still contain mistakes that might cause offence.
User avatar
ericbee123

Re: RAF100

Postby Tommy on Tue 29 May 2018, 2:28 pm

#RAmeh
User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff

Re: RAF100

Postby AMB on Tue 29 May 2018, 11:18 pm

I have spoken to a few RAF crews about the RAF100 logo and they are indeed embarrassed that there appeared to be no effort in its design.
Having said that, it's 100% better than the logo designed for the RAF's 50th Anniversary in June 1968...simply because there wasn't one and don'tr recall anyone mentioning it. Nor were there any special paint schemes, so are we expecting too much these days?
Adrian
User avatar
AMB

Re: RAF100

Postby effects on Tue 29 May 2018, 11:41 pm

AMB wrote:I have spoken to a few RAF crews about the RAF100 logo and they are indeed embarrassed that there appeared to be no effort in its design.
Having said that, it's 100% better than the logo designed for the RAF's 50th Anniversary in June 1968...simply because there wasn't one and don'tr recall anyone mentioning it. Nor were there any special paint schemes, so are we expecting too much these days?

That's why the hunter was flown through tower bridge.
Sony DSC-HX400V (Sony DSC-HX300 and DSC-H2 retired)
User avatar
effects

Re: RAF100

Postby Alanko on Wed 30 May 2018, 12:16 pm

Spiny Norman wrote:You could argue that although it looked a lovely occasion, without the RAF's role in UK history the royal family would be speaking German.


The Royal House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha speaking German? Heaven forbid!
Alanko

Re: RAF100

Postby starbuck on Wed 30 May 2018, 12:21 pm

effects wrote:
AMB wrote:I have spoken to a few RAF crews about the RAF100 logo and they are indeed embarrassed that there appeared to be no effort in its design.
Having said that, it's 100% better than the logo designed for the RAF's 50th Anniversary in June 1968...simply because there wasn't one and don'tr recall anyone mentioning it. Nor were there any special paint schemes, so are we expecting too much these days?

That's why the hunter was flown through tower bridge.


I'd settle for something similar this year if any disgruntled RAF pilot feels so obliged.
starbuck

Re: RAF100

Postby Harvo266 on Wed 30 May 2018, 12:23 pm

I'm still going to be brave (or stupid..?) and say that I do like it on the Typhoon. It would be a fair comment to say I like it more than the people who fly it though :facepalm:
Shuttleworth SP
Torbay
Cosford
Weston
Yeovilton
RIAT
FIA
Eastbourne
Bournemouth
Ostrava
Duxford

Nikon D500
User avatar
Harvo266

Re: RAF100

Postby Spiny Norman on Thu 31 May 2018, 9:35 am

Alanko wrote:
Spiny Norman wrote:You could argue that although it looked a lovely occasion, without the RAF's role in UK history the royal family would be speaking German.


The Royal House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha speaking German? Heaven forbid!


Or Mountbattenberg...
I want to see a flying Mosquito in the UK. I'm supporting The People's Mosquito.
http://www.peoplesmosquito.org.uk/
User avatar
Spiny Norman

Re: RAF100

Postby Stagger2 on Thu 31 May 2018, 10:25 am

Aint that a cake? :wink:
Stagger2

Re: RAF100

Postby Spiny Norman on Thu 31 May 2018, 12:56 pm

Stagger2 wrote:Aint that a cake? :wink:


Ja!
I want to see a flying Mosquito in the UK. I'm supporting The People's Mosquito.
http://www.peoplesmosquito.org.uk/
User avatar
Spiny Norman

PreviousNext

Return to Aviation Waffle

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Agg and 24 guests