WH904Seriously. Don’t worry. It’s a coat of paint. It will come off. Some one is paying to restore old aeroplane with their own money. It’s hardly an insult to anyone nor is it worth getting depressed about. See it as an extension of the aircrafts working life. It will be a display aircraft and so it night have a nice bright scheme to boot. Like the red bull sea vixen . It eventually ended up in a scheme more appealing to enthusiasts.
None of the above is necessarily true though. The paint might come off but it might not. It might not be an intentional insult to anyone but bizarre paint schemes certainly do offend a lot of people and some people do get depressed about it. As you say, it could be part of an extension of an aircraft’s working life but some people (myself often included) sometimes wonder if some aircraft are worth flying if they look nothing like they did when they were in military service. Likewise there are no guarantees that any aircraft will eventually end-up in a scheme that appeals to enthusiasts. Many aircraft simply do not.
The Sea Vixen was a classic example. I thought the whole notion of using Red Bull’s money to fly the aircraft was pointless. I would have rather the aircraft stayed on the ground to conserve its life until another sponsor was found that didn’t want to treat a rare historical artefact as a billboard. It was/is easy to say that Red Bull are helping to keep some great aeroplanes flying but I don’t buy this notion at all. They’re simply exploiting historical machines to advertise their awful drink. It was very fortunate that the Vixen was eventually able to fly again in more appropriate colours but I still have to wonder what point there was in flying it for so long when it looked like a circus clown.
To be honest (and this is probably heresy) I’m never particularly comfortable with XH558 wearing a paint scheme that no operational Vulcan ever wore. It’s a bizarre mix of the matt-finished wrap-around camouflage applied to Red Flag Vulcans, and the glossy scheme applied to the MRR machines. Okay, it was applied by the RAF and the aircraft did fly as a display machine in its current colours, but there’s something slightly depressing about seeing a Vulcan that really doesn’t look like a Vulcan. I guess my general view is that colours and markings are just as important as any other aspect of preservation, even though some might regard such issues as trivial. In my view they’re not trivial. It’s rather like putting a telephone box in a museum and painting it purple. Okay, it’s still a telephone box, but is it the “real thing” any longer?
But of course any owner is entitled to do whatever he likes with his own property. I just hope that whoever has bought the Jaguar will look at it as more than just a fancy jet toy to play with. If it suddenly appears in some “Thunder City” black colours or something equally hideous, I fear we get back into the “Sea Vixen debate” again – some will shrug their shoulders, while others groan in agony! Incidentally, I wouldn’t object to the paint scheme in the photo above – even though it’s pretty wild, it was an in-service paint scheme, even if not for long (it also reminds me of the whole saga, when 6 Squadron’s boss first contacted me seeking some help with his plans to paint a Jaguar… look what happened – eek!).
WH904Now I’m starting to worry – I hadn’t thought about the possibility of the Jaguar appearing in some ghastly paint scheme. I suppose it’s quite possible given past experience with US warbirds, but let’s hope and pray that the owner doesn’t do anything ridiculous.
I guess any owner is entitled to paint his plane any colour he likes but it is very depressing when one sees classic aeroplanes wearing colours that are more appropriate for the circus. For example, those beautiful Starfighters over in Florida are magnificent but the colour scheme is just a big disappointment. But it happens everywhere – one recalls the famous “Miss Demeanour” Hunter that some people liked and some (myself included) hated with a passion. Then there was the Sea Vixen in Red Bull colours… I feel sick just thinking about it!
I suppose it’s just a case of frustration for those who care about historical accuracy versus those who don’t see what all he fuss is about. I’ll keep my fingers crossed that the Jaguar’s owner is in the former category!
I often wonder why they seem to have their flag EVERYWHERE!
Maybe because they’re proud of their country, unlike here in England where most people seem to be either embarrassed to be English, or somehow obsessed with being part of Europe. Worse still, we can’t display our flag here without looking like some dumb football supporter! I’d really like to know why we have to be so shy about our own flag. Heaven knows more than enough people have died to defend it.
WH904I hope the Tornado is progressing well. If ever an aeroplane was perfectly suited to ground runs, that’s the one! Is there any news on the ex-Gatwick Shackleton? Seems to be very little news on this machine…
WH904I certainly wish them well. Even though it’s on the other side of the Atlantic, it would be good to know that a former RAF Jaguar was back in the air. I’m quite surprised that anyone in the States has such enthusiasm for the Jaguar!
WH904Wings – I’m old enough to know that safety issues are important. I’m also old enough to know that it’s easy to whine about how things are. But at the same time I think it’s true that we’ve got into a situation where complaining about H&S nonsense is seen as a recreational pastime and nobody takes it seriously. What does frustrate and depress me is that society has grown to accept the more nonsensical aspects of H&S as an inevitability. Nobody seems willing or able to say that some (a lot) of H&S stuff is just ridiculous. As with so many aspects of modern society, we roll-over and accept stuff which is patently stupid. The high-viz jacket saga is a trivial but classic example. The notion that anyone is somehow safer by wearing a jacket is just specious. If that kind of notion was to be taken seriously, then we should all wear a jacket every time we stepped out of the house. I just miss the days when common sense prevailed and we didn’t need to have rules imposed upon us by people who are perceived to be “experts” at pointing-out either the obvious – or the not very likely! 🙂
WH904What drivel.
Your opinion of course. I’m heartened to know that a lot of people think H&S is complete rubbish. I’m happy to accept that a third party might be able to identify potential safety risks, but as you will know, we have gone a long, long way beyond this simple act. We’ve now reached a stage where pretty-much everything is perceived as a potential safety risk. The logic (and I use the term very loosely) of this concept is that every action has risks attached to it. Of course this is true, but we used to be able to accept this fact without today’s almost hysterical attempts to avoid risks (and the ensuing litigation, etc).
It’s a bit like the way that air shows have been made so “safe” that they are sterile. The height and distance from spectators means that the best view of the air show is inevitably enjoyed from outside the boundaries of the show site. What kind of absurdity is this? The safety of spectators is paramount, and yet the safety of the neighbouring residents evidently doesn’t matter? Madness!
I recall grabbing a few snapshots of the TSR2 at Cosford by swiftly stepping over the “safety” barrier. As I expected, I’d taken my photos before the museum official arrived to tell me that stepping over the barrier was a crime. The usual mutterings about safety followed, and yet just a few weeks later I was able to freely crawl all around the same aircraft without any restrictions when the hangar was opened-up for a model show. Presumably the aircraft poses less of a danger when the museum officials aren’t there?
As for high-viz jackets, it is simply a fashion, pure and simple. The very idea that somebody is “safer” in a fluorescent jacket is simply silly. Not only does it imply that everyone is so blind as to be incapable of seeing someone unless they’re fluorescent (which is patently untrue), it also implies that by wearing a jacket one is free to be somehow less responsible, as if the cure-all jacket will keep you from danger. We all know it’s utter nonsense. All that has happened is that another silly “bandwagon” effect has come into play, and everyone jumps aboard. Worse still, it becomes so entrenched in common practise that anyone who fails to conform runs the risk of litigation, on the basis that failure to use these silly jackets does actually pose a safety risk, when there is no evidence to suggest that a high-viz jacket has ever saved anyone from so much as a scratched thumb.
I guess a lot of us will have noticed how construction companies now have to erect fences around each floor of the buildings they’re erecting. It’s hilarious, as if the construction workers are likely to throw themselves off the building, even though (inexplicably) they’ve always managed to avoid doing this. The question that always worries me, is what safety precautions are put in place for the people that erect the fences? Do they have to be tethered to the building before they dare to venture out? If so, who protects the people who install the tethers? Actually, come to think about it, what about the safety of H&S people? 🙂
WH904Should we stop to consider precisely how many lives have been saved on airfields and at air shows, aviation media events, etc. because of high viz jackets? I suppose the H&S people would reply that we must ask ourselves how many lives would be lost if people did not wear high viz jackets. Either way, the figure seems to be less than one. Despite this, the nonsense continues. How I miss the days when people were responsible for their own actions and H&S was not a cure-all for stupidity. It all rather reminds me of a classic scene in “Absolutely Fabulous” when Edina Monsoon is in Court for a driving offence. She rants about the parlous state of the country, and the way in which railings have to be erected to stop “stupid people” from throwing themselves into the road. “Tax the stupid!” she exclaims 🙂
WH904Yes, that seems to be the case – they don’t make the news pages very often. All of the above aircraft have had their share of media coverage but I haven’t heard anything about them in ages. I guess one has to assume that no news is good news, whereas in the UK, it often means bad news! 🙂
WH904I think the whole high-viz jacket nonsense was symptomatic of my disillusionment with air shows, media events, plane spotting in general. True, I lost interest when the range of aeroplanes worth seeing began to dwindle, but when I think of how free and easy things used to be, the thought of being herded like cattle in my safety gear is enough to keep me firmly in bed. When I think of some of the antics I (and my colleagues) used to get up to, I feel truly sorry for today’s enthusiasts. I guess things will only get worse. If we blindly pursue our national (well, European) obsession with safety any further, we’ll have air show crowds being handed a compulsory high viz jacket upon entry, to watch aeroplanes flying flat circuits five miles away. Or maybe the ultimate expression of this nonsense will be the confinement to virtual screens!
WH904I will hope for some results with fingers crossed! Trouble is, even in the US it seems to be rare that anyone has the logistics/money to fly anything that is beyond the usual WWII warbird category. It was a tragedy that the Shackleton wasn’t kept flying and of course there’s a Lighting that has been progressing (slowly) to flight status for years. But I guess a Jaguar might just make it – if a Sea Harrier can fly then a Jaguar seems entirely practical, especially when there is still an active spares source over in India. I haven’t heard anything about the various F-100s that were flying over there in a long time… or the F-4 or the A-4…
All we can be certain of is that there’s a much better chance of some exciting developments in the US, unlike here in the UK. I fear the looming retirement of the Vulcan will be the end of “airborne exotica” in UK skies (although I’ll happily settle for a Shackleton!)
WH904Good luck to him – I don’t imagine we’ll ever be able to see such a spectacle in the Jaguar’s country/s of origin 🙁
WH904Hmm, it’s certainly something I haven’t seen before – it’s a Mk.2 Shackleton but I have no further information on it 🙁
WH904Yes, very good images – a fresh look at an over-photographed location!
WH904Hmm… you’ll be telling me this one is fake too?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]237966[/ATTACH]
WH904David, you seem to have misunderstood what I said – suggest you read it again more carefully 😉
Sign In
