Visiting the USS Farragut

[UK Airshow Review]

• Sam Wise and Rich Pittman visited the Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer USS Farragut during its brief visit to HMNB Portsmouth.
  
  

[Berf]

I can't seem to find anyone flagging up this was visiting in advance... can anyone point me to where it was mentioned - thanks

[Wissam24]

USN movements aren't announced in advance for security reasons.

[Berf]

So when it arrived in Portsmouth unbeknown to you as USN don't make advance announcements you asked for permission to do the article?

[Wissam24]

Well, it wasn't unbeknownst to us because we'd been in touch with the relevant people beforehand, which is why this visit was organised for us.

[Berf]

So it's a private visit under the guise of the United Kingdom Airshow Review - reviewing something no-one else could go to and even when it did arrive no one 'in the know' mentioned it.

Good to know the US has no security concerns about UKAR staff though. I guess some people will be interested in the review - I was - but I also guess some might see it as a way to ingratiate yourselves to those that decide who gets to visit and to ensure your 'published media credentials' for the next time a 'secret' visit arrives out of the blue.

Sour grapes you might say but actually I feel more like its using UKAR readers to ensure your own personal trips. Oh well good luck to you maybe I would do the same...

[Dan O'Hagan]

I look forward to the launch, no pun intented, of the US Naval Review forum and subsequent website.

Sorry chaps, but this does smack of using the UKAR name to get yourself some access and some pictures for your own personal gain. Never what UKAR was about on my watch.

What exactly does this visit have to do with airshows?

[Wissam24]

It was kept "secret" because that was the request. It wasn't secret when it did arrive in Portsmouth, but don't blame us for you not noticing it. If you feel you personally have been snubbed by the US Navy for some reason, I'd recommend being asked to join and produce content for content outlets who work to create these opportunities and generate interesting feature articles. That's how journalism works.

It was a visit offered by the US Navy TO UKAR, and given both the Carrier Strike Group element (following on from our report from the George H W Bush last year, which is also not an airshow) and the aviation component on board detailed in the report, it seems perfectly applicable to an aviation magazine, one which has published any number of non-explicitly-airshow related pieces, including many "under your watch". Given that an article has been published, I'm not entirely sure how you can claim it's being done for personal gain. Presumably you never enjoy any of the football matches you commentate on, Dan? However, I will recommend to the rest of the team your suggestion that we make sure not to enjoy any visits we take part in to produce content for UKAR.

[boff180]

Never what UKAR was about on my watch.

What exactly does this visit have to do with airshows?

On “your watch” you, personally, had a ride along in the Goodyear Blimp and also undertook base visits to cover aircraft retirements.

In the same period of “your watch” there were Feature articles published which involved air to air tanker rides, multiple base visits and visits to Carriers undertaken - all of which not related to airshows.

Non-Airshow feature reports have always been published by UKAR as you full well know.

[Berf]

Well as a journalist, when you have a piece of information, like 'an interesting ship has arrived at Portsmouth' you tell people. That's how journalism works. And if you are planning to be a journalist you should perhaps reflect on your second sentence. While your report has obviously been published, I am afraid to some it looks more like 'written and published' to ensure I get to know about the next 'secret' visit' as a prime motive rather than than to inform the UKAR masses.

[jingernut]

Well as a journalist, when you have a piece of information, like 'an interesting ship has arrived at Portsmouth' you tell people. That's how journalism works. And if you are planning to be a journalist you should perhaps reflect on your second sentence. While your report has obviously been published, I am afraid to some it looks more like 'written and published' to ensure I get to know about the next 'secret' visit' as a prime motive rather than than to inform the UKAR masses.

You know there are more websites than just UKAR to keep an eye on what's happening in the UK. You could follow any number of naval tracking sites to see when ships are coming and going. It's not down to UKAR staff to spoon feed you information about things happening all the time.

[Berf]

Not asking to be spoon-fed - just informed by UKAR staff when they have knowledge that would be of interest to the readers of their 'publication.'

[Tommy]

I'm not responding with my "staff" hat on, I haven't really had much to do with the piece, and Sam is free to justify how and what he writes about.

Not asking to be spoon-fed - just informed by UKAR staff when they have knowledge that would be of interest to the readers of their 'publication.'

But just on this comment, isn't the "publication" itself the announcement and write-up of it?

I don't know how long the Farragut was in Portsmouth for. IIRC it wasn't very long. It seems to have been there around two or three days or so at most. Sam and Rich visited on 24th April, and, according to a quick google, it departed later that day.

It's already been said that UKAR was requested by the hosts not to disclose any details of it beforehand, so they couldn't go posting head's up about it before. And it departed on the same day as the visit took place. So even if either of them were able to give a head's up after the visit, given the restrictions and time constraints, the window of opportunity would have been so tiny, I wonder, would anything have been able to be done about it by you or anyone else?

So the line of questioning you're taking is pretty irrelevant at worst, moot at best?

Again, I'm not defending Sam or anything here, he can do that himself, it just seems a really odd point that you're making.

Or, rather, the point's fine to make, but you've made it already, now the way in which you're trying to implement it in this instance is so tiny and niche, it feels like you're getting hung up on something pretty insignificant.

[Wissam24]

Just to add to that, when I asked if we could put anything on SM about it, I was specifically told to wait until they departed at that. In the end, I decided there wasn't much point doing so after the ship had left Portsmouth anyway.

[Berf]

Tommy - I have no desire to prolong this anymore than my original point but if people respond I too can respond to them. As for tiny and insignificant points I can point you to hundreds of them in various threads.

Finally - what I mean by 'publication' in the context above was UKAR or UKAR as an online publication.

And that's the end!