PortageeDon’t think it as a series but a one of episode of the Science type show QED.
It appeared to be a single nonstop view of the UK coastline from a camera mounted on a Hawk I think….the stinger at the end as they explained how they did it, was that it was a rear facing camera and the footage was being show in rewind.
PortageeThis show is available on the BBC iPlayer in the BBC Archives
http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/aerialjourneys/5334.shtml?all=1&id=5334
Martin
Not quite how I remembered it…but then again I was about 12 when it was broadcast.
Thanks for the link though.
PortageeThe BBC were reporting that his Protection Officer would be on board with him…Not much room with the Doctor/paramedic and patient in the back of a EC135.
A bit more room with the newer EC145 but attending a major incident an extra Paramedic or his body guard?
PortageeThis is based on there not being a monetary union.
I suspect that there will be one, but the SNP will have to “buy it” by allowing rUK more than 5 years to move Trident.
There is a certain irony though regarding the MOD…. RN warships have to be built in the UK… shipyards on the Clyde won’t be able to bid. But we are quite happy for Scotland to remain the base for our Nuclear weapons, because we know the NIMBY’s in Portsmouth are ready to kick off at the suggestion they move to there.
It’s not just the SNP that are speaking with forked tongue here.
As for the rest of the UK not being involved in the vote… Surely Scots have a right to self determination. If Scotland voted Yes, but the rest of the UK decided Scotland should stay part of the Union …then what??
An even bigger political mess moving forward than we could face on Friday.
PortageeI can’t believe some of what’s been written in this thread.
Has anyone on here actually read the anything about the Scottish Governments proposals because it doesn’t sound like it?
[URL=”http://scotreferendum.com/reports/scotlands-future-your-guide-to-an-ind…]
It clearly points out that if there is a Yes, then a divorce period would begin during which Scotland would have to begin the process of creating Scottish Government departments and Organisations for things that are currently administered UK wide. This would include things like work & Pensions, Defence; organisations such as a Scottish DVLA, Passport services.
I’m not an SNP member by any means and don’t agree with everything that the Yes campaign plan to do. I’m simply pointing out what has been proposed that clearly hasn’t been heard very clearly outside of Scotland.
Regarding Assets, if it’s an agreed figure of 8.4 % of all tax raised in the UK comes from Scotland, then the argument is that 8.4% of any piece or equipment that the UK Government owns in the UK is Scottish.
Discussing this with fiends I’ve referred to divorce credits, a government purchased box of 100 pens might be worth 0.1 divorce credits, a Trident submarine might be worth 10 billion divorce credits with everything else valued in between. The SNP are clear that it doesn’t want Trident so could 4 x 10 billion x 8.4% = Scotlands share of Trident in Divorce credits.
Using the DVLA as an example,, It might cost more than 8.4% of whatever value is put against the DVLA, equipment and it’s systems, for the Scottish government to set up an equivalent, so could use some of those credits to either “buy a copy” of the DVLA system to run in Scotland, or fund the setting up of a whole new system.
UK government owned land or Buildings in Scotland will have divorce credits valued against them as well no doubt, so much of those credits will offset against land and buildings in the rUK, that we probably won’t hear mention f then in any negotiations.
It’s the tiny details of negotiation that will really take time and effort to come up with something that works for everyone…remember there are UK government Departments that have offices in Scotland that carry out UK wide work, that would have to be re-arranged so it’s not just Scotland having to set up new agencies, the rUK would have to re-organise it’s workload as well.
One thing is for very certain… There is no such thing as the Status Quo regarding the UK.
The fact that a referendum is happening and that it appears to be as close as it is… the UK (if it remains) will never be the same again.
PortageeThe best outcome for Scotland may well be Yes… but Yes may not be the best outcome for rUK. Only a Yes and someone reading History 100 years from now would be in the best position to judge the answer to that.
I object to the idea that Yes is the emotional vote and No is based on intellect.
I’m an educated person who intends to vote Yes. That choice is base on intellect as well as emotion.
I know that Both sides have been blowing smoke regarding costs, Oil & Gas etc. But what I can see and understand is that whilst the current UK government is telling Scotland that the Oil and Gas wont last long and actually won’t amount to much financially.
Yet during the concessions now being offered by the No campaign of new Scottish power on tax etc, the UK government isn’t letting go of the Oil and Gas Money. Could it be because they know that actually there is more than enough to allow an Independant Scotland what it plans to do ??
Everyone is entitled to their belief, In my view, Scotland can’t do any worse than what my (and previous) generations have had to live with under Westminster rule.
If an independent Scotland falls on it’s Backside then at least it’s at our own hand.
PortageeWell the Scots particularly and the Northern Irish and Northern English do pretty well out of Westminster subsidies. And it may have escaped your attention but the whole of the UK is represented at Westminster by several hundred MPs.
Subsidies paid from by amoungst other things Oil and Gas revenues from the Scottish Sector…revenues which whilst the Government are saying aren’t that great and will run out…won’t put them on the table as part of their devolution promises for Scotland should it vote No. I wonder why that could be ???:rolleyes:
Not everyone thinks the Government of the day having 1 sitting MP in Scotland is representative.
PortageeI’m not sure I follow your analogy of ‘divorce credits’?
Just because Scotland ‘owns’ 8.4% of every ‘asset’ of the United Kingdom does not somehow magically provide an extra 8.4% equivalent in money to duplicate that part of the asset that does not exist in Scotland. These are only ‘assets’ in the sense of the essential service they provide, not in the sense that they have any sale value; there is no cash in the system.
Let us take the example of the DVLA. In your analogy Scotland could trade an equivalent value of (I don’t know) Forestry Commission land for the 8.4% of the DVLA that Scotland ‘owns’; fine, but where does the cash come from to build the Scottish DVLA?
As for Trident, Scotland doesn’t want Trident, so I’m not so sure that Scotland should be able to claim any ‘credit’ for trading it. Trident was a democratic decision of the United Kingdom government; if Scotland wants to cherry-pick what Scotland doesn’t want post-independence then that is fine but why should the rest of the United Kingdom pay a credit for it, so to speak? Also Scotland will hardly wish to credit the Rest of the United Kingdom for the Trident facilities that will be abandoned in Scotland.
Can Scotland be successfully divorced from the United Kingdom? Yes, of course, but I don’t think the costs to both parties should be underestimated. And these will be real costs, real costs running into billions of pounds, and they will be real costs that will need to be met very quickly (by borrowing money) at a time when government borrowing, especially for a newly-independent Scotland, could be very expensive.
The whole point of my using divorce credits rather than using Money is because it’s very difficult to place a financial value on somethings. At no point have I suggested that there will be blank cheques being handed around.
The negotiations that would take place if Yes, would involve a re-distribution of those assets. Whether that be a second copy of the master programme that the DVLA runs, but then loaded up with Scotland only data. The DVLA is perhaps not the best of examples, I only used it due to the Original Posters reference to it.
I genuinely believe that many of the physical assets of government will offset each other. The real assets to be transferred will be the knowledge and in many cases the computer programmes, used by different departments. Scotland already has civil servants who currently work for UK wide UK Government departments, some of those may end up doing exactly the same thing for the New Scottish Government department, others may find themselves moving to other areas.
Getting on to Trident, and this is a military forum afterall. Scottish tax payers contributed 8.4% of the cost of those 4 subs, the missiles, the specialist handling kit etc. it doesn’t want 8.4% of that. But their value in divorce credits would go along way. Even if it “costs” Scotland bartering back 2 or even 3% (Random numbers) as a contribution to re-location costs else where in the rUK. The facilities wont be abandoned many specialist bit of kit were designed to be taken down and re-located, and these would go with the Subs. Faslane itself will become the Joint HQ the Scottish Defence Force, as well as becoming the main operating base for the ScotDF’s naval arm.
PortageeLook on amazon, there are a number of “me and my body” type books that will when the time comes help to make the discussion easier.
PortageeCan we please move on, and return this thread back to news articles.
PortageeYou would think that RR would want to partner with either P&W or GE on the ACE (Adaptive Cycle Engine)??? This would be a huge plus for the former. As it could get a share of the PCA and/or NGAD. In addition to the Tempest………..That would be a smart move in my opinion.
If partnering with PW or GE, then the US would have a veto over sales, if it’s purely UK tech, then we could sell to whomever.
Of course if other areas within the airframe have US based Tech so would be a moot point.
PortageeI for one appreciate all of Tango III’s efforts in providing new stories from around the world. OK so he’s been duped by one particular story, that’s older than first appeared. So what, it happens.
Please I hope Tango III continues to post the excellent work that he does on this site.
PortageeOn the section index page, on the right of the latest posters name is a little blue box with what should be 2 white arrow heads (but they are so small they aren’t that clear). Clicking on this will take you to that latest post.
PortageeIf it’s genuine then I’d suggest it has more to do with the carriage, deployment and aiming systems than the weapon itself as it’s drawn. As has ben suggested above it cold be for some form of retractable recon unit or thinking further ahead it could easily be a development “Turret”for an air-to-ground directed energy (laser) type weapon
PortageeYou have a love the story about a “top secret” aircraft factory and the new bomber being built there.
The B-21 program is not just secret but “special access,” …
The story comes complete with a convenient map and description of it’s location, what it looks like from the outside and one of it’s vault like meeting rooms, oh yeah and a list of what else gets built there. 🙂
Sign In
