snibbleSorry. Aviation. I can see the British aerospace industry and defence procurement looking west to make a contribution to projects like F35 rather than Typhoon.
snibbleGuys, I am sorry, but you are describing a local government choice. The EU doesn’t mandate that Eastern Europeans or whatever, will be paid less to undercut me, you or anyone. I’m sorry to say but there is a lot of political choice to come up with tools for ths not to happen and the EU had nothing to do with this. That’s why I said we have been narrow minded on this.
In part you are correct. If the government were less wedded to their paymasters and more interested in their own people they could have applied an incomes policy. perhaps a similar arrangement to when I worked overseas and my employer had to not only demonstrate that he had advertised for a local but also offered a competative salary. To that extent it is a “local” government choice except that within the EU the government is not permitted to make those choices, they would be illegal. Ultimately with nothing to lose I have just taken the option of choosing to not pay any more. Those who benefited from the EU did so at the expense of many of their fellow countrymen who saw their training and expertise in the field in which they earn their living devalued and devalued. It’s not that I don’t care if the leaky boat sinks, I’m just fed up with doing all the bailing whilst the first class passengers get ice cream.
snibbleIn addition to this, whilst cheap labour benefits employers, it does not pay sufficient tax and NI contributions to maintain its share of public services. The bulk of the influx has been unskilled, low wage labour, and the unemployed looking for work. That drags down the average contribution and leaves the NHS, schools and other public services overburdened and this has been witnessed across the whole North of England. It also drags down wages across the board in that bracket, meaning that everyone in that bracket contributes less. It has also served to reduce GDP/capita, meaning that it is conclusively not beneficial overall. The taxpayer is subsidising the costs of choices made by low income recruiters, plain and simple. Then you have the reduction in average indirect tax contributions caused by negative wage impacts combined with an accumulation of low income employees.
Taxpayers in western EU countries were blindly walked into an underhand arrangement where they’d have to subsidise the affects of big business expanding into Eastern European countries and putting people out of work. Sorry but I simply wasn’t consulted about this. It’s bad enough having to contribute £10bn/year net to rebuild the ex-Warsaw Pact without having to subsidise the employment costs of their entire populace at an ever growing rate. Neither my country nor I benefit from this arrangement in any way, it’s not the EEC we agreed to in 1973/1975 or the EU we signed up to in 1992. It’s an agreement where I pay money in and get out nothing except queues, NHS waiting lists, over-subscribed schools and an increasingly worse standard of living. Don’t get me wrong, I feel terrible for Eastern Europe but it isn’t my job to fix it, because neither I nor my country f’ed it up in the first place.
I hope that those who have not witnessed these factors at work have some idea now of the pressures on so many kept silent by the fear of being branded “racist”. There any many who tell us the country is now screwed but for some of us it already was, and so were we. If a few deprived of cheap labour to exploit now have trouble working out where this month’s Mercedes is coming from well I call that “a price worth paying”.
snibbleI will attempt to sum up the view from where I sit.
I always, as an article of faith considered the EU to be a good thing worth defending. When the referendum came along I looked closely to arm myself to do just that. After 40 years of EU membership it seems to me that if the EU is good for me I should be able to look out at people doing a comparable job to mine in the non EU liberal democracies of the world and identify the advantages the EU had given me. Well I look at Canada, Australia, the USA, new Zealand and so on and I can’t find any sign of the working man suffering from hardship that the EU has spared me.
The EU has had significant costs resulting from picking up the survivors of 40 years of communism. This has taken two forms, development funded from the EU budget and the working man taking a hit in his pay. Eastern Europeans will often do skilled work for 20% less. If you have not seen this and had personal experience well good for you but that doesn’t mean I haven’t. On the contracting circuit I see hotels exclusively staffed by Eastern Europeans. Can’t get Brits to do the job? Or can’t get them to do it at the price? Meanwhile as labour costs fall that’s great for business and for the “country”. This presumes that “The country” has abandoned and discarded it’s working class in exchange for cheaper imports.
Up to now any voice of dissent has brought an assurance from the right that the minimum wage will not be undercut (gaining a technical skill is well worth it then) and from the left a frothing at the mouth accusation of racism. The fact is that business has been using an oversupply of cheap labour to shaft the working man whilst the rest of the country looks on and applauds the profits. For many who voted out the real benefits of the EU were not apparent because they went elsewhere, but the cost were very real. I recall one person during the campaign stating in a BBC interview that wages deflation was “A price worth paying” for the benefits. It is easy to say that when you are receiving the benefits and someone else bears the costs.
To conclude, I would trust that all members of this forum would wish to see democracy defended.
snibbleAs Reimar Horten wrote in 1950:
“…with the advent of radar, wood constructions already considered antique,
turned into something modern again. As reflection of electric waves on
metallic surfaces is good, such will be the image on the radar screen; on the
contrary, on wood surfaces, that reflection is little, these resulting barely
visible on the radar.”
There we go then. Mosquito, the first stealth bomber. Mark 1 Hurricane must have been near invisible too.
snibbleWell I’m no expert but some thoughts nonetheless. Firstly the bizarre notion that Germany had some quantum leap in aircraft design just around the corner that would have turned the tide of the air war. I have seen some FW twin boom design hailed as inspiration for the vampire, a back of a fag packet sketch that inspired a design that had already flown? There are loads of enthusiasts for this point of view who seem to fail to recognise that the quantum leap was called the Me 262 and any other of these wonder weapons were a distraction from that. Rant over.
Horten. A flying wing design and there I think anything in common with B2 ends. The idea that the Horten would have had any pretensions to what we now call stealth is laughable. To tie it to B2 and F117 is ridiculous. Had it appeared in action it would have meant less 262s and would have succumbed to the same rat catcher tactics, and shortage of fuel, spares and pilots.
When could this thing have got to squadrons in strength? Would the allies have been idle in the meantime? Google “Convair B36”. As an offensive aircraft would it have coped with meteors, vampires and P80s?
snibblecurious – the invasion stripes seem to have been converted into something like part-swastikas
Well if you read the report it’s a fictionalised German occupation, that could represent “Surrender markings” to disguise the 1944 scheme in a 1940 setting. Most viewers won’t notice.
snibblePerhaps this is why the MOD discourage searching out remains. Maybe they’d rather spend the budget flying Typhoons than shuttling the descendants of servicemen around the world.
snibbleStill go for the Fulmar. Judge what you think is the best fighter the FAA had, then check which was the most successful. Most people would Give the Fulmar “better than a Skua” and leave it there, It’s no Gannet, Martlet or Seafire but since most of it’s opposition had to either come to it or abandon it’s mission, and were long range heavy aircraft the Fulmar really did it’s job superbly well and scored more kills than any other fighter in FAA service.
snibbleTo clarify, because I think there has been some misinformation in this respect, but in the event that Flt Sgt Copping’s remains were found or identified then they would not be ‘repatriated’ as has frequently been stated.
He would be buried in theatre (at El Alamein) with a military funeral at the cost of HMG and relatives flown out to the ceremony by MOD.
Very appropriate. I think that’s just the job but still fail to see why the bones need to be present.
snibbleThere are a couple of issues that I can see.
First there appears to be no British organisation similar to those of other nations, whose responsibility is specifically the recovery of MIA remains – if there is, then it is inadequately funded and does not go to the same lengths, and does not have the same support, as those of other nations. Getting this organisation established requires government support – pushed by British public support. The failure to pursue Dennis Copping’s remains merely highlights this deficiency. MIA recovery is certainly not the RAFM’s reason for being – and yes, because there isn’t a proper body to do so, the MOD’s handling of statements etc was decidedly poor.
There is no such organisation as far as I know. Historically the British fighting man lies where he falls. Not literally of course, but certainly in theatre. I believe this tradition was broken in the aftermath of the 1982 war when some remains were repatriated and this has since become the norm. I may be wrong but I believe that to be the case. A modern Tommy serving overseas would expect in the event of his death to be repatriated to his loved ones. In the 1940s I think they would have found it unfathomable. There are many American servicemen buried here in England, should they go home? or is it enough that they lie among friends in a free country? If it is a proper respectful commitment to eternity that is needed then is not a ceremony at the edge of the desert for ALL the fallen appropriate, just as over the sunken ship? We really should not superimpose modern sensibilities retrospectively. His family may find it helps to travel to the crash site and place a cairn or something, plenty of people have gone to the site of a loved one’s demise to pay respects and I would suggest that presuming the aircraft doesn’t remain hidden for another 70 years will have a better and more appropriate memorial than most.
snibbleI have a relative on the L24 and another on HMS Barham. Is it up to me whether a recovery operation is mounted?
snibbleThis is not going to make me popular but please give it a moments thought before bellowing in outrage.
What is so important about bones? Copping has no further use for them, they have no historical or rarity value. Thousands of men must be buried in the desert and bones could easily be those of an Italian soldier or an unfortunate local. The aircraft is treated as a priority because it is the priority. If it had never been discovered there would have been no thought of looking for the poor chaps remains and his name would have not been on so many lips. If there is an issue of Christian sensibilities then let his church put their money where there mouth is and go find him. Just like the sunken dead under a wreath tossed from a stationary warship Dennis Copping has vanished from human sight. Just like thousands of his comrades and adversaries the desert swallowed him all those years ago. He’s in more fitting company there than in some churchyard.
snibbleInteresting stuff this. For doing the job without acclaim, with reasonable success how about the Fairey Fulmar?
snibbleI thing Sgt Coppins is beyond caring.
“Better by far
For Johnny-the-bright-star,
To keep your head,
And see his children fed.”
Sign In
