'Taxi for Windsor'.

Discussion in 'Diamond Lil's' started by finknottle, May 1, 2008.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. It has emerged that William Windsor spent 3 hours in Kandahar to meet the troops before flying on to Qatar. To me this is nothing more than a transparent PR Job and comes in the wake criticism for his actions earlier in April when he and his brother, Prince Harry, had travelled to their cousin's pre-wedding celebrations in an RAF Chinook helicopter. It was piloted by Prince William from RAF Cranwell in Lincolnshire to Woolwich barracks in London where he picked up his brother. The pair then continued on to the Isle of Wight, where they disembarked and met Princess Anne's son, Peter Phillips, who is getting married next month.

    The sooner the Windsor’s are replaced with an elected Head of State the sooner we can call ourselves a modern democracy.
     
  2. silverfox

    silverfox War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    and no other miltary aviator has ever done a similar thing?
     
  3. The commanders in Afghanistan are often heard stating that they could do with more helicopters in theatre, yet here we have one spare for these two part time warriors to swan around in.

    As for your question I expect you know the answer to that or you would not have asked it.
     
  4. janner

    janner War Hero Book Reviewer

    I suspect that this was more a Crab PR stunt than one for the Royals
     
  5. So you're saying that 100% of the helicopter force should be permanently deployed to Afghanistan/Iraq?

    And as for the elected head of state... you really think that some Neue Arbeit f*ckwit would be better than the Queen (God Bless 'Er)?
     
  6. An elected head of state. :pukel: Is this the same as the current elected labour party where only 34% of the country voted for them. Now there is democracy at work eh Mr Scottish Republican :thumright:

    I think more attention should be made to our corrupt politicians paying there family wages for doing nothing and claiming Tv licences because they are not at home :money: . The royals are an easy target and they will be damned if they do and damned if they dont.
     
  7. silverfox

    silverfox War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Its a bit hard to train pilots on an aircraft type if they are all away.....

    And of course I know the answer - but do you?
     
  8. No I am not saying that 100% of the helicopter force should be deployed to Afghanistan, what I am saying is that the ones here are not some toy for the GPS's to jolly off in. These are military helicopters paid for and maintained by the taxpayer, pointless question really.

    I think it is plain enough for you to understand but never the less I will attempt to explain it to you.

    The people would elect the Head of State from a list of candidates who may or may not be from a political party, you know just like an election. If the chosen person turned out to be as you so eloquently put it a f*ckwit the country would be in a position to bin them. The Windsor’s are where they are through acts of violence in the past and using that criteria one could theoretically challenge Charlie to a punch up winner takes all. Even though I repeat myself the whole concept is a complete anachronism and should be consigned to the history books.

    SF, the answer to your question has no bearing on the matter under discussion.

    When the taxpayers pays for the training of a military pilot they should expect something in return, don't you think?
     
  9. silverfox

    silverfox War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Yes it does - as they were conducting training sorties at the time - or do you think they were alonne in the aircraft..... A well known practice amongst aircrew of all Services - usually under the FACIT tag - remember the Harrier lot who went to Spain for a leaving jolly?

    PR own goal scored by Crabs as whilst an overflight of a house or cadging a lift is ok for the rank and file, they neglected to think about the Press interest.


    (FACIT - F**k About and Call It Training..)

    Edited to add - and so you don't think its a good thing that a future monarch gets as far into an operational area as possible to try and see what is going on first hand...
     
  10. Who is this William Windsor you speak of?

    Last protocol meeting we had here in the colonies should the young Prince arrive for training, was to be informed that the style of address to be Mountbatten-Windsor if a surname was to be used. The surname Wales if it was within a military connotation.

    I'm slightly appalled that a discussion is about to ensue with respect to a serving member of HM Forces. Do the young Princes not deserve the same treatment as anyone else on these forums, and that their careers are not up for a public spectacle?
     
  11. So what is it called when Brown and Browne turn up in operational zones?? Of course that is not a PR stunt for the public is it?? Isnt that a waste of vital operational aircraft to transport no good politicians around putting our own troops in harm to save there cowardly asses!!
     
  12. Get real will you, N-D!

    If the "young princes" got the same treatment as anyone else on these forums, don't you think they'd be screaming their privileged heads off?
     
  13. Streaky the reality is, that the COs have made that rule. http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=62649.html

    On one hand, the membership cries foul if Norman posts personal info about someone but if the name happens to be William or Harry, they are fair game. However that is moot as this is the toy of the COs and they have made their call on it.
     
  14. Come on now it's not as if he is going to be a career RAF Pilot, yet we have paid for his training. Next he is off to become a Master Mariner by spending a couple of weeks with the Andrew and who know he may even commandeer a Mine Sweeper to take him off to meet up with his chums, Jack of all trades and master of none springs to mind.

    Yet again I see that some have trouble differentiating between elected and un-elected and the importance of those words.

    While we are at it you really need to get rid of the English national anthem dirge; we all have our own, I mean what is it all about? My suggestion would be the theme tune to the Archers namely Barwick Green, it’s a grand catchy tune and easy to whistle along too.
     
  15. This was discussed on ARRSE yesterday. The mods ended up locking the thread and I don't blame them. Despite overwhelming support for Prince William's action in joining an RAF flight to visit the troops in Kandahar, the only posters The Times chose to quote, supposedly representing the views of the Armed Forces, were the two critics, one of whom was an anonymous American with an O2 tag and the other distinctly reminiscent of Fink (link).

    I asked the same question then as I ask now. Why are the usual suspects always so quick to slag off any influential figure who demonstrates support for our troops - and on a Services website too? Aren't there enough of the other sort to moan about?
     
  16. Purple_twiglet

    Purple_twiglet War Hero Moderator

    Bearing in mind the aircraft was on a scheduled flight, the visit cost nothing extra. The troops appreciated it, and if escorting a body of a fallen soldier home and meeting the parents makes william appreciate the awesome power and responsibility he will oneday have (namely the power to order us to war) then so much the better.
     
  17. While we are at it you really need to get rid of the English national anthem dirge; we all have our own, I mean what is it all about? My suggestion would be the theme tune to the Archers namely Barwick Green, it’s a grand catchy tune and easy to whistle along too.[/quote]

    Oh God it is Normans brother :w00t:
    Stand fast the women services, off caps, finky one step forward march. apply straight jacket at the double and muster at G floor Haslar while humming the tune to the dambusters :thumright:
     
  18. Don't get me wrong, I'm no republican. I'm in favour of a Royal Family, albeit slimmed down. I think Princess Anne has made the right call.

    However, the 2 princes will never be treated the same as an average serviceman. An average serviceman can not go to a fashionable London club and spend thousands of pounds on booze in one night. My point being, is that if they did get treated as an average serviceman, they wouldn't know what hit them. Especially at the ranks they hold at the moment.

    I'm not saying it's wrong, it's just the way it is.
     
  19. In any other country Royals can do what they like. This isn't a celebrity we're talking about; not just a guy with money. This is the future King of England. Sounds pants but as far as I'm concerned it's not really our job to speculate.
     
  20. Streaky totally agree with your post just bit baffled by what this topic is supposed to be proving except for a devout republican to air his views which by the way is his democratic right.

    If we talk about the chinook flight a waste of money could someone then explain how the Government can find £50 billion pounds to give to the banks and £100's of billions of pounds to keep northern rock in business. Maybe if some of this money that this Government cant give to the defence budget as it is strapped for cash :thumright: to buy more helo's this pointless topic would be arrrrrrrrrrrrr oh yes pointless. :whew:
     

Share This Page