Simviation Forums

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005570153,00.html

how many errors or mistakes can you pick out?
And as far as I am concerned who really cares, as long as the plane was going that way anyway.

OOOOOO a Supersonic Hawk ....... I bet Charlie is looking forward to that  ::)

Charlie would be the best one here to comment on this but the tabloids never miss a chance to have a poke at royalty & the services. This was too good to miss & kills two birds with one stone. The fact that it gives the completely wrong idea about it is neither here nor there. Joe Public will believe it & that's all that matters.

(Staff) Continuation Training. Just so happens they went to Lyneham (a good place to go for a landaway ), and that happens to be near his house. So what.  ::)

Maybe just as well they never found out about my joyride in the Hunter T.7 back in 1959. I've often wondered how much that cost the taxpayer.

Still, I reckon I've paid for it many times since.

Maybe just as well they never found out about my joyride in the Hunter T.7 back in 1959. I've often wondered how much that cost the taxpayer.

I'd better keep my mouth shut!

Lol, Hawks aren't supersonic anyway. They do mach 0.9. They can only go supersonic if they dive. Says a lot about The Sun.

Lol, Hawks aren't supersonic anyway. They do mach 0.9. They can only go supersonic if they dive.

So technically they are supersonic then ... It's in the syllabus at Valley, so is a (reasonably) regular occurance...

Lol, Hawks aren't supersonic anyway. They do mach 0.9. They can only go supersonic if they dive. Says a lot about The Sun.

Similar to the Hunter then. I know they were supersonic in a dive as we did it - twice.

PS. I reckon with the amount of tax they've had off me in the last 45 years they could have purchased a whole squadron of Hunters.

So technically they are supersonic then ... It's in the syllabus at Valley, so is a (reasonably) regular occurance...

The way The Sun words it, it sounds like he was going supersonic all the way there, burning more fuel, costing more money etc...  It may have been the ac was needed down there anyway, so a passenger on-board would not have hurt.  

Some clever listener on BBC Radio 2 suggested that it was definatley cheaper than catching a British Rail train to his final destination...
Love it...
It has got to be cheaper to fly from London to Scotland than to go by train, nowadays......... ...!

LOL...!

Paul... ...!

I'd better keep my mouth shut!

Hmmm. Do you realise that technically I'm your boss - or one of them?

[quote]
It may have been the ac was needed down there anyway, so a passenger on-board would not have hurt.

Thanks to the vigilance of the hysteria-stirring media, almost every time I mention to someone that military flybys at airshows, etc. are part of routine training flights, they simply refuse to believe it. They seem to think somebody tosses a fighter jock the keys and says: "go give 'em the old razzle-dazzle down at the football stadium, kid, and pick us up some pizza -in Italy- while you're at it...the taxpayers will hate that!".

Of course! It's a lot more fun to be angery at something than it is to understand it. :-/