I agree that things are slightly different in a plane crash than in this circumstance.

I don’t know about families, and I would hope that the AAIB don’t get their ideas from internet boards, but there is at least one that the press have got stories and opinion from in the past. I’m not aware of any stories that have come from this site, but I don’t think that we would want this board to become the source of some of the often misguided aviation stories that we often spend our time criticising.

I’m one of the English people who Phil speaks of who to be honest couldn’t care less if Scotland becomes independent or not.

If it does become independent, I will wish it well, and hopefully the two countries will be able to have a mutually beneficial relationship together in the future.

For an independent Scotland to acheive its full potential, though, it will need the help of the best people it can find. Just because someone didn’t support independence doesn’t immediately make them unsuitable for a role in Government (or any other organisation or position).

It does concern me that Scotland could harm its best interests by seeking to use its new independence to continue to try to divide the two countries when there will be many issues where we would be better off working together.

Hi,

At the risk of being slightly pedantic, and not defending these scrotes in any way, I would have thought that should the worst happen the perpetrators would end up, if they were unlucky, getting a manslaughter rather than a murder charge.

However, that still doesn’t stop you putting the signs up….

And it is probably worthwhile contacting the local media about what is going on as well in advance of any reward, especially if you are unhappy with the reaction of the police/airport management.

It probably wouldn’t do much more than get a nice glib statement from the dibbles about how they are keeping the airfield under regular surveillance blah blah blah which may not mean much in practice but when the toe rags hear it it may serve to discourage their activities for a while.

It may be best to focus on how disappointed you are with the reaction of the police rather than the safety angle – if you have an ‘anti’ campaign at the airfield the last thing you would want is articles appearing about aircraft crashing onto Salisbury.

PR is my dayjob – if you want to talk it through, pm me.

Neil

Having been out of this discussion so far, I’m happy to add my condemnation to what the Marines did.

We are supposed to be better than the Taliban – the marine’s action shows that at least some of our guys seem keen to stoop to their level.

And the idea that the ‘hearts and minds’ campaign is mere rhetoric and not part of a soldier’s brief I find particularly worrying. The hearts and minds campaign isn’t about a direct military defeat of the Taliban, but is about winning the hearts and minds of the average Afghan so that that are at least neutral towards the Taliban, rather than active supporters.

Don’t forget, the Taliban are doing the same toward those same people, and if they win their support it will make things much harder for our guys.

This isn’t a war that is going to be won shooting and bombing everything. It is only going to be won when the Taliban lose the support that they enjoy from the ordinary Afghan people, hence the importance of trying to win over the average guy in the street.

The role of the military in this war has changed from that of conflicts in the past. Our people need to realise that, to avoid handing the Taliban a propoganda victory like this has and making things harder for our troops.

There are clearly two audiences for this story.

Firstly, there is the enthusiast, who is looking for something as historically accurate and authentic as possible. I’m not familiar with the original film, but from reading the posts in this thread, it seems to tick all of the boxes.

Secondly, there is the general cinema goer / film watcher, who is just looking for a couple of hours entertainment, and maybe as a consequence, some aspects of the true story may be overlooked, and other liberties taken with the story to make a good film.

If the eventual film ends up being the latter, we shouldn’t be too critical of it. What should matter to us as a community with an interest in aircraft is that the film is a sucess, and gets good reviews and audiences.

While we may not get a 100% historically accurate film, it will hopefully see a general public that views both the war and the military as being increasingly distant and irrelevant to them leaving the cinema knowing a little more than they did before they went in and hopefully it will trigger some of them to learn some more about the raid in particular and aircraft in general.

If it does this, we should welcome the film, rather than criticise it for any inaccuracies.

I read Vulcan 607 a couple of years ago, and agree that it is an excellent read.

I’m not really into historic or military aviation, but still thoroughly enjoyed the book. As j_jaza says, it reads like an excellent thriller, and the fact that it is true makes reading the book not just a very enjoyable experience, but a humbling one too, especially as you read about all of the air to air refuellings and you realise just how finely tuned the whole operation was.

At totally the other end of the scale, I have just read Dear Air 2000 by Terry Ravenscroft. In the book, Ravenscroft engages in an often surreal, sometimes funny but always inventive correspondence with a number of major airlines.

If you have got a Kindle you can get it free from Amazon – I’m not sure that I would want to buy it, but if you can get it for free it is well worth downloading, as it will provide the occasional chuckle and you will marvel at how cleverly Ravenscroft keeps the dialogue going when the airlines try to end the correspondence.