Boris's plane
- tankbuster
- Posts: 2316
- Joined: Sun 17 Jul 2011, 5:04 pm
Boris's plane
Boris has been to Aberdeen in Falcon 900 G-ZAHS which is registered to the RAF. It often flies with an Ascot call sign but today is flying as KRF18 what is KRF
Trevor C
recent and not so recent pictures here https://trevorc28a.wixsite.com/trevspics
recent and not so recent pictures here https://trevorc28a.wixsite.com/trevspics
Re: Boris's plane
KRF is the ICAO code for United Kingdom Royal VIP Flights, callsign "Kittyhawk".
It would appear that today's jaunt to Scotland has been subsidised by the Royal Family, hence the callsigns.
It would appear that today's jaunt to Scotland has been subsidised by the Royal Family, hence the callsigns.
- tankbuster
- Posts: 2316
- Joined: Sun 17 Jul 2011, 5:04 pm
Re: Boris's plane
Thanks, I suppose it just a case of whose budget it comes out of.
Trevor C
recent and not so recent pictures here https://trevorc28a.wixsite.com/trevspics
recent and not so recent pictures here https://trevorc28a.wixsite.com/trevspics
Re: Boris's plane
Both he and Liz Truss were at Balmoral today. Did they fly on the same aeroplane?
- Thunder City Veteran
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Wed 25 Jan 2012, 3:49 pm
- Location: Derbyshire, UK
Re: Boris's plane
Truss flew on G-ZABH as KRF16.
My Air History photos https://www.airhistory.net/photographer ... k-Ferguson
Re: Boris's plane
thanksThunder City Veteran wrote: ↑Tue 06 Sep 2022, 3:53 pmNo they didn’t…that would be a security issue, and a national embarrassment in the event of an accident.
Re: Boris's plane
Can we change policy to put them both on the same plane in the hope it crashes? Surely that would be a positive outcome for the country not an embarresment, our new prime minister IS a complete emabarresment - she's worse than Boris!Thunder City Veteran wrote: ↑Tue 06 Sep 2022, 3:53 pmNo they didn’t…that would be a security issue, and a national embarrassment in the event of an accident.
Re: Boris's plane
I won't give your previous disgusting response the time of day. But to this one The Crown Estate pay more than the Monarchy take out. 2021 was a net income of £269m, 75% of which goes straight to the Treasury.
UBC-15X, 800XLT, 3500XLT, VT-225, Pro-2006, Pro-2042, IC-7300, IC-7100, Airspy R2
Sony a58, Sony 70-300G
Sony a58, Sony 70-300G
Re: Boris's plane
[/quote]
Can we change policy to put them both on the same plane in the hope it crashes? Surely that would be a positive outcome for the country not an embarresment, our new prime minister IS a complete emabarresment - she's worse than Boris!
[/quote]
Disgraceful comment. Looking forward to your apology.
Can we change policy to put them both on the same plane in the hope it crashes? Surely that would be a positive outcome for the country not an embarresment, our new prime minister IS a complete emabarresment - she's worse than Boris!
[/quote]
Disgraceful comment. Looking forward to your apology.
HTAFC
- Ian G
- UKAR Staff
- Posts: 2243
- Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 6:21 pm
- Location: Wolverhampton, West Midlands, UK
- Contact:
Re: Boris's plane
As much as we're all entitled to our opinions on politicians and government, your comment is way over the line. Let's keep the thread on track please
Re: Boris's plane
Absolutely! This is an aviation forum & we don't want "jokes" about crashing aeroplanes on here; it is really bad taste!
Speaking of taste; maybe food poisoning would've sufficed?
Re: Boris's plane
It's a national disgrace that they flew at all. Truss should have taken the train the evening before and Johnson could have done the same. If he really needed to give a speech outside Number 10 he could have resigned without then flying to Scotland.Thunder City Veteran wrote: ↑Tue 06 Sep 2022, 3:53 pmNo they didn’t…that would be a security issue, and a national embarrassment in the event of an accident.
I'm sure HM would have coped.
At a push you could argue Truss's flight back was more justifiable, but it would have sent a more positive message if she'd trained back too. It's not as if she couldn't work on a train.
It's a shame, that's my point. 4 avoidable flights - certainly 3 anyway. (I assume BJ flew back too.)
"There's only one way of life, and that's your own"
Re: Boris's plane
I wonder if there's a reason it couldn't have been done by Zoom. HM does Privy Council meetings by Zoom and she is getting on now.CJS wrote: ↑Wed 07 Sep 2022, 7:39 pmIt's a national disgrace that they flew at all. Truss should have taken the train the evening before and Johnson could have done the same. If he really needed to give a speech outside Number 10 he could have resigned without then flying to Scotland.Thunder City Veteran wrote: ↑Tue 06 Sep 2022, 3:53 pmNo they didn’t…that would be a security issue, and a national embarrassment in the event of an accident.
I'm sure HM would have coped.
At a push you could argue Truss's flight back was more justifiable, but it would have sent a more positive message if she'd trained back too. It's not as if she couldn't work on a train.
It's a shame, that's my point. 4 avoidable flights - certainly 3 anyway. (I assume BJ flew back too.)
-
- Posts: 3038
- Joined: Tue 28 Aug 2012, 6:57 pm
Re: Boris's plane
Presumably PMLT will have to trot back up there asap in the event of HM being succeeded in the near future, to swear fealty to the new King? Prep the jet...
Re: Boris's plane
Are airshows a National disgrace as well ?CJS wrote: ↑Wed 07 Sep 2022, 7:39 pmIt's a national disgrace that they flew at all. Truss should have taken the train the evening before and Johnson could have done the same. If he really needed to give a speech outside Number 10 he could have resigned without then flying to Scotland.Thunder City Veteran wrote: ↑Tue 06 Sep 2022, 3:53 pmNo they didn’t…that would be a security issue, and a national embarrassment in the event of an accident.
I'm sure HM would have coped.
At a push you could argue Truss's flight back was more justifiable, but it would have sent a more positive message if she'd trained back too. It's not as if she couldn't work on a train.
It's a shame, that's my point. 4 avoidable flights - certainly 3 anyway. (I assume BJ flew back too.)
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Thu 25 Sep 2008, 9:21 pm
Re: Boris's plane
Thanks everyone for all your political rants, just what I want to read on an aviation forum.
Re: Boris's plane
Point completely missed (or, I suspect, not...).Flyforfun wrote: ↑Thu 08 Sep 2022, 2:42 pmAre airshows a National disgrace as well ?CJS wrote: ↑Wed 07 Sep 2022, 7:39 pmIt's a national disgrace that they flew at all. Truss should have taken the train the evening before and Johnson could have done the same. If he really needed to give a speech outside Number 10 he could have resigned without then flying to Scotland.Thunder City Veteran wrote: ↑Tue 06 Sep 2022, 3:53 pmNo they didn’t…that would be a security issue, and a national embarrassment in the event of an accident.
I'm sure HM would have coped.
At a push you could argue Truss's flight back was more justifiable, but it would have sent a more positive message if she'd trained back too. It's not as if she couldn't work on a train.
It's a shame, that's my point. 4 avoidable flights - certainly 3 anyway. (I assume BJ flew back too.)
"There's only one way of life, and that's your own"
Re: Boris's plane
Should now be referred to as "Charles Force One"........?!
- capercaillie
- Posts: 9336
- Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 3:04 pm
- Location: Leominster
Re: Boris's plane
Why would a Falcon 900 with a civi-reg become Charles Force One?
Its an odd obsession we have in the UK?
Is the German A350 becoming Olaf Force One?
The Japanese 777 Naruhito Force One?
We don't have Putin Force One or Felipe Force One, not even Biden Force One.
Just a weird thread.
Its an odd obsession we have in the UK?
Is the German A350 becoming Olaf Force One?
The Japanese 777 Naruhito Force One?
We don't have Putin Force One or Felipe Force One, not even Biden Force One.
Just a weird thread.
Re: Boris's plane
Don't think it's specifically tied to the Royal family or flights relating to - it's been used by PMs on quite a few occasions which didn't involve any of the Royals.
Re: Boris's plane
I think it's known as the Royal Flight because of its predecessor in the 1930s. It's funded entirely by the taxpayer via the government and is really the British official government VIP flight. It is part of the RAF as 32 Squadron but I noticed today that someone was greeting the new king in a non-RAF uniform, standing beside the airstairs looking official.
These aeroplanes are civil registered but are they civil operated?
Re: Boris's plane
The ICAO code is nothing to do with 32 Squadron. I've just rechecked and thee "operator" for KRF is slightly different to what I stated, which makes a little more sense. It's actually United Kingdom Royal/VIP Flights, the oblique being an addition to what I stated.
There's also KRH, for which the operator is United Kingdom Royal/VIP Flights (civilian operated aircraft).
RRF also exists as UK royal positioning flights (in military aircraft).
The Falcons are owned by Centreline at Bristol, but operated by the RAF on paper at least, hence the use of KRF for their callsign.
King Charles III flew back to Northolt on G-LEGC, which naturally used the KRH code (KRH20R) as it's civilian owned and operated. He's often flown on Luxaviation aircraft rather than using RAF ones, which flying around the UK and Europe.
There's also KRH, for which the operator is United Kingdom Royal/VIP Flights (civilian operated aircraft).
RRF also exists as UK royal positioning flights (in military aircraft).
The Falcons are owned by Centreline at Bristol, but operated by the RAF on paper at least, hence the use of KRF for their callsign.
King Charles III flew back to Northolt on G-LEGC, which naturally used the KRH code (KRH20R) as it's civilian owned and operated. He's often flown on Luxaviation aircraft rather than using RAF ones, which flying around the UK and Europe.