Red Arrows to use only 7 aircraft in 2012
Discussion
Just seen some news on various sites about the Red Arrows being down to only use 7 aircraft for 2012 instead of the usual 9. Apparently they will still use 9 for official fly pasts and that sort of thing.
http://icburton.icnetwork.co.uk/news/natnews/tm_he...
Kisty Stewart doesnt seem to want to fly after being affected by the 2 deaths in 2011. She will assume some sort of ground role. The article indicates she may not fly for upwards of 6 months.
They should be back up to 9 again for 2013. Obviously training in pilots with just 3 months to go is a non runner. I wish them all a successful 2012 display season
http://icburton.icnetwork.co.uk/news/natnews/tm_he...
Kisty Stewart doesnt seem to want to fly after being affected by the 2 deaths in 2011. She will assume some sort of ground role. The article indicates she may not fly for upwards of 6 months.
They should be back up to 9 again for 2013. Obviously training in pilots with just 3 months to go is a non runner. I wish them all a successful 2012 display season
Edited by 300KPH on Sunday 4th March 18:08
Edited by 300KPH on Sunday 4th March 18:10
Sam_68 said:
300KPH said:
Kisty Stewart doesnt seem to want to fly after being affected by the 2 deaths in 2011.
And they want front-line female combat pilots?How long would she have lasted flying fighters in 1916 or 1940, I wonder?
Or maybe you're not. Let me know if that's the case and I'll try again with smaller words.
crofty1984 said:
Surely you're intelligent enough to realise that being in the frontline of battle and losing two colleagues (where it's expected) is very different to doing a peacetime job and losing two colleagues within a year in accidents.
Or maybe you're not. Let me know if that's the case and I'll try again with smaller words.
No, I'm afraid you'll have to try again with smaller words. Or maybe you're not. Let me know if that's the case and I'll try again with smaller words.
I'm afraid I'm of the old-fashioned opinion that if you select a very high risk profession within the armed forces, you have to live with the fact that every now and then someone you know is going to get killed.
Surely you're intelligent enough to realise that accidents occur when flying military combat aircraft, even in peacetime?
If you can't stand the heat...
Edited by Sam_68 on Sunday 4th March 18:27
So you would prefer that she be forced to continue knowing that she is not comfortable with it, and that the remaining members of the team are relying on her for their safety despite that?
Traumatic events can affect anyone regardless of gender, and I don't really see anything wrong with someone re-evaluating their personal exposure to risk having had their mortality thrust in their face in the worst way more than once in quick succession.
Traumatic events can affect anyone regardless of gender, and I don't really see anything wrong with someone re-evaluating their personal exposure to risk having had their mortality thrust in their face in the worst way more than once in quick succession.
Sam_68 said:
300KPH said:
Kisty Stewart doesnt seem to want to fly after being affected by the 2 deaths in 2011.
And they want front-line female combat pilots?How long would she have lasted flying fighters in 1916 or 1940, I wonder?
I'm reading Bomber Boys at the moment and there is a whole chapter on LMF. You should read it.
tank slapper said:
So you would prefer that she be forced to continue knowing that she is not comfortable with it, and that the remaining members of the team are relying on her for their safety despite that?
No, I would prefer that she had been weeded out by the selection process before we spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer's money training her to fly fast jets.But failing that, yes, a good b
h-slapping and being told to pull herself together and get on with the job she's been trained and paid to do would be second favourite. 
Edited by Sam_68 on Sunday 4th March 18:53
Eric Mc said:
I'm reading Bomber Boys at the moment and there is a whole chapter on LMF. You should read it.
Yes, I've read it; it's a good book. So is Fighter Boys.But it's a matter of degree, isn't it - I would be more forgiving of somone who cracked under the strain of a protracted tour of high-mortality combat missions than someone who suffered the statistical likelihood of losing the occasional colleague doing something that is clearly and obviously a high-risk occupation from the outset.
And I didn't say that male pilots are immune from it - and would look upon it in the same way if they were.
Sam_68 said:
Yes, I've read it; it's a good book. So is Fighter Boys.
But it's a matter of degree, isn't it - I would be more forgiving of somone who cracked under the strain of a protracted tour of high-mortality combat missions than someone who suffered the statistical likelihood of losing the occasional colleague doing something that is clearly and obviously a high-risk occupation from the outset.
And I didn't say that male pilots are immune from it - and would look upon it in the same way if they were.
I would say that Two out of nine in a couple of months is quite a high mortality rate in anyones book. But it's a matter of degree, isn't it - I would be more forgiving of somone who cracked under the strain of a protracted tour of high-mortality combat missions than someone who suffered the statistical likelihood of losing the occasional colleague doing something that is clearly and obviously a high-risk occupation from the outset.
And I didn't say that male pilots are immune from it - and would look upon it in the same way if they were.
Serious question, Sam, do you deliberately hunt out Threads to argue on them?
Sam_68 said:
tank slapper said:
So you would prefer that she be forced to continue knowing that she is not comfortable with it, and that the remaining members of the team are relying on her for their safety despite that?
No, I would prefer that she had been weeded out by the selection process before we spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer's money training her to fly fast jets.But failing that, yes, a good b
h-slapping and being told to pull herself together and get on with the job she's been trained and paid to do would be second favourite. Edited by Sam_68 on Sunday 4th March 18:53
[1] in a combat situation she'd be just as effective a killer as any other pilot. But perhaps the effect of having [perhaps] witnessed a colleague being killed by the very device that was supposed to save his life may have had an effect.
[2] you haven't a clue what you are blethering about.
I guess there are a number of things to consider regarding this matter.
Surely when you join the RAF you would expect there is chance to loose co-workers, ok not during display or practice activities but the risk is always there. Surely also if she joined the RAF it would not be outside the norm to be expected to shoot down enemy aircraft or bomb a ground installation while on active duty. We all understand she lost two friends in the last 12 months which has to be difficult.
I also feel sorry for the pilot flying the 8th aircraft who has now been resigned to the odd ceremonial fly by because Kirsty has stepped down. I understand a lot of the formations dont look symetrical with 8 aircraft and hence the cut back to 7. He is now relegated to effectively a year off after this decision.
Is it now possible that we may not see a return to 9 aircraft due to firstly cost cutting and secondly to preserve existing air frames. I think if many people where asked how many airframes were in a red arrow display the common answer would be between 5 and 12 so the powers that be may see no need to go back to 9. Hopefully I,m wrong but this could all be the catalyst for a permanent reduction.
Surely when you join the RAF you would expect there is chance to loose co-workers, ok not during display or practice activities but the risk is always there. Surely also if she joined the RAF it would not be outside the norm to be expected to shoot down enemy aircraft or bomb a ground installation while on active duty. We all understand she lost two friends in the last 12 months which has to be difficult.
I also feel sorry for the pilot flying the 8th aircraft who has now been resigned to the odd ceremonial fly by because Kirsty has stepped down. I understand a lot of the formations dont look symetrical with 8 aircraft and hence the cut back to 7. He is now relegated to effectively a year off after this decision.
Is it now possible that we may not see a return to 9 aircraft due to firstly cost cutting and secondly to preserve existing air frames. I think if many people where asked how many airframes were in a red arrow display the common answer would be between 5 and 12 so the powers that be may see no need to go back to 9. Hopefully I,m wrong but this could all be the catalyst for a permanent reduction.
I'm not setting out for a ruck here but I'm astonished at the replies here (other than 300KPH).
Sam makes infinite sense in every post, and if you can't see it I'm sorry but you need to recalibrate your brains.
crofty1984 said:
Surely you're intelligent enough to realise that being in the frontline of battle and losing two colleagues (where it's expected) is very different to doing a peacetime job and losing two colleagues within a year in accidents.
Is being a fighter pilot a 'peacetime job'? If and when war breaks out, do we send to the peacetime pilots off for a relaxing break in the country while we try and find some 'wartime' ones?egor110 said:
You can sit there reading your bomber boys books thinking you know it all whilst she's actually doing the job.
But she's not.Sam makes infinite sense in every post, and if you can't see it I'm sorry but you need to recalibrate your brains.
Simpo are you saying they picked a red arrows pilot who has no front line experince, who just happens to be a woman?
How do you know how you'd cope if a colleagues just stepped on a ied and is lying on the floor screaming because pieces of him have been blown off, or you were on a airbase and just witnessed a colleague being launched through the cockpit of his plane?
You don't know for sure how you'd handle it, you might of been trained but you'll never know for sure until it happens.
How do you know how you'd cope if a colleagues just stepped on a ied and is lying on the floor screaming because pieces of him have been blown off, or you were on a airbase and just witnessed a colleague being launched through the cockpit of his plane?
You don't know for sure how you'd handle it, you might of been trained but you'll never know for sure until it happens.
I think the whole premise of this argument is utterly ridiculous. I'd wager that if the pilot that had stepped down was a male it wouldn't have made the news, much less be talked about here.
I work in a profession in which occasionally my colleagues get killed or seriously injured. I'm fortunate enough not to have had any of the people I work with closely die. If I do I don't know how I'll react but if carrying on with my job puts my colleagues at risk I'll be finding another role sharpish, regardless of how many people may make snotty comments on an internet forum.
I work in a profession in which occasionally my colleagues get killed or seriously injured. I'm fortunate enough not to have had any of the people I work with closely die. If I do I don't know how I'll react but if carrying on with my job puts my colleagues at risk I'll be finding another role sharpish, regardless of how many people may make snotty comments on an internet forum.
Simpo Two said:
Sam makes infinite sense in every post, and if you can't see it I'm sorry but you need to recalibrate your brains.
No I think you do. It is a long time since we put people up against the wall and shot them for cowardice when they suffered mental problems. I would have hoped that people would have similarly moved on, but the same old ignorance and misunderstanding rears its head yet again.You can't predict how people will react to traumatic events - one person will be fine, another will be broken by it. There is no test for it, and there is no set level of trauma that triggers it. All that can be done is that when someone suffers from it, they are treated appropriately. It is very unfair to judge someone because of it.
In any case, this is speculation since I don't believe the RAF have given a reason behind the move, and really it is no one's business but theirs.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff